> I believe that user could get GIN's error about work_mem only intentionally:
> - turn off autovacuum
Meanwhile, in the other thread, we're having a discussion about people
wanting to do exactly this on a database-wide basis during peak load
hours...
> - set big work_mem
> - populate table with GIN index (by needed number of insertion)
> - prepare query which will return a lot of results (possibly, with
> seqscan=off because cost of scan of pending list grows fast)
> - decrease work_mem for at least ten times
> - execute query
Why would the new work_mem need to be 10x smaller than the old work mem?
...Robert