On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Pavan Deolasee
<pavan.deolasee@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Pavan Deolasee
>> <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > But I actually wonder if we are over engineering things and
>> > overestimating
>> > cost of memmove etc. How about this simpler approach:
>>
>> Don't forget that you need to handle the case where
>> maintenance_work_mem is quite small.
>
> How small? The default IIRC these days is 64MB and minimum is 1MB. I think
> we can do some special casing for very small values and ensure that things
> at the very least work and hopefully don't regress for them.
Sounds like you need to handle values as small as 1MB, then.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company