On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 03:53:38PM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2024 at 02:40, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 03:35:17PM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> > > "Additionally, vacuum no longer silently imposes a 1GB tuple reference
> > > limit even when maintenance_work_mem or autovacuum_work_mem are set to
> > > higher values"
>
> > Slightly adjusted wording patch attached and applied.
>
> Thanks for adjusting.
>
> It's a minor detail, but I'll mention it because you went to the
> effort to adjust it away from what I'd written...
True.
> I didn't make a random choice to use "or" between the two GUCs.
> Changing it to "and", IMO, isn't an improvement. Using "and" implies
> that the silent limited was only imposed when both of these GUCs were
> set >= 1GB. That's not true. For the case we're talking about here, if
> autovacuum_work_mem is set to anything apart from -1 then the value of
> maintenance_work_mem does not matter.
Okay, changed to "or".
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Only you can decide what is important to you.