Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem

On 10/09/2013 11:06 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
>
> The assumption that each connection won't use lots of work_mem is also 
> false, I think, especially in these days of connection poolers.
>
>


Andres has just been politely pointing out to me that my knowledge of 
memory allocators is a little out of date (i.e. by a decade or two), and 
that this memory is not in fact likely to be held for a long time, at 
least on most modern systems. That undermines completely my reasoning above.

Given that, it probably makes sense for us to be rather more liberal in 
setting work_mem that I was suggesting.

cheers

andrew