Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>> Hmmm ... maybe query_work_mem and maintenance_work_mem, or something > >>> similar? > >> > >> I'll go with these unless someone has another proposal ... > > > The only confusion is that you can use multiple query_work_mem per > > query, but I can't think of a better name. > > True. Maybe just "work_mem" and "maintenance_work_mem"? > > BTW, I am going to look at whether GUC can be persuaded to continue to > allow "sort_mem" as an alternate name, if we rename it. That would > alleviate most of the backward-compatibility issues of changing such > a well-known parameter name.
Good. It is not like we have a huge namespace limitation in there. I wonder if we could cost it as a list of string pointers, null terminated. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
