Received: from makus.postgresql.org (makus.postgresql.org [98.129.198.125])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 633BBCE6EC
	for <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 16:25:34 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from mail-ey0-f174.google.com ([209.85.215.174])
	by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <pgsql@j-davis.com>) id 1Sfc9F-000887-9F
	for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 19:25:33 +0000
Received: by eaak11 with SMTP id k11so1037733eaa.19
	for <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:25:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=google.com; s=20120113;
	h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date
	:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding
	:x-gm-message-state;
	bh=R/7U+TuUNB1Iuvz33wMjUQsy75MRo57ylBjol1mhTeI=;
	b=LyMuokoQ42gugWpoCLURH/btKMUOm3O4jL8kGNaHh+WgXsB3AiMoW6l3wJzd2s6krS
	6QFdUasjMuE0XG+wLm+kxAuld8IsUGfj8OCFVD4LyvEdcOxxOyVedNZk+K+9Ws+BmJqw
	RxuYaE/5ug8FXbVVsiIhMw/XO3fQgx1Whfogsg3MqrfQ7KWzNqM8ZOLPTQazv4SD9V2+
	qWMdLc5DS7ifwzldCoAuJi7KYxQSxJSMIKe3WGpkwqGfrOGvzZsPhXysYnMMGMrDyS9g
	Y5ZDDMFffM4Wu5WdRNIinn+BUoNqjdL/fGK1NRs5BH5eHdfZuZTy2gevbHOgWJFq0VFU
	1pVA==
Received: by 10.14.94.194 with SMTP id n42mr1615528eef.24.1339788319065;
	Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:25:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:::1? ([2600:3c01::f03c:91ff:fe93:2ae4])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id g46sm33985413eea.14.2012.06.15.12.25.16
	(version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:25:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Comment on max_locks_per_transaction
From: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: pgsql-docs@postgreSQL.org
In-Reply-To: <4FDB796A.7080803@agliodbs.com>
References: <4FDB796A.7080803@agliodbs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:25:14 -0700
Message-ID: <1339788314.16772.3.camel@sussancws0025>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Gm-Message-State: 
 ALoCoQlkpSc0DYjgtZoYetoHrpt7uVcOEfagXDMvvTDUYFSbo3m5Osxr9V3Hh08Loo/1VQvhfnHK
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--)
X-Archive-Number: 201206/4
X-Sequence-Number: 7363

On Fri, 2012-06-15 at 11:05 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> The default, 64, has historically proven sufficient for most databases,
> but you might need to raise this value if you have clients that touch
> many different tables in a single transaction.  Databases with several
> tables with many partitions each can require raising this setting.

Is "partition" defined somewhere else in the docs?

Maybe it should say something like: "Extensive use of table inheritance
is the most common reason to increase this value from the default",
assuming that's what you meant.

Regards,
	Jeff Davis