X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6278711F6602
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Thu,  6 Apr 2006 05:57:47 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 92494-08
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Thu,  6 Apr 2006 05:57:42 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from svr4.postgresql.org (svr4.postgresql.org [66.98.251.159])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1696911F6677
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Thu,  6 Apr 2006 05:57:45 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from smtp1.voila.fr (smtp2.voila.fr [193.252.22.175])
	by svr4.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FEBB5AF88B
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Thu,  6 Apr 2006 08:57:45 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mwinf4104.voila.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 433021C0050E
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Thu,  6 Apr 2006 10:57:41 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from wwinf4101 (wwinf4101 [172.22.152.28])
	by mwinf4104.voila.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 3E6EE1C0064F
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Thu,  6 Apr 2006 10:57:41 +0200 (CEST)
X-ME-UUID: 20060406085741255.3E6EE1C0064F@mwinf4104.voila.fr
Message-ID: <14743652.1144313861246.JavaMail.www@wwinf4101>
From: luchot <luchot@voila.fr>
Reply-To: luchot@voila.fr
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Maintenance_work_mem influence on queries
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_142242_16791070.1144313861245"
X-Originating-IP: [129.185.75.10]
X-Wum-Nature: EMAIL-NATURE
X-WUM-FROM: |~|
X-WUM-TO: |~|
X-WUM-REPLYTO: |~|
Date: Thu,  6 Apr 2006 10:57:41 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.946 required=5 tests=[HTML_10_20=0.945,
	HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
X-Spam-Score: 0.946
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200604/103
X-Sequence-Number: 18187

------=_Part_142242_16791070.1144313861245
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello,
I am doing some test with differents values for the parameter maintenance_work_mem in order to
ameliorate the time for the creation of index and and the use of vacuum and analyse.
I read in the doc that this parameter is just for create index, vacuum and analyse and foreign key .
But when i test 2 queries with differents values the result are twice big :
for mwm to 64 Mo   the query 1 last 34 min and the query 2   41 min
for mwm to 512 mo the query 1 last 17 min and the query 2 21 min
So my question is in what condition the parameter maintenance_work_mem influence on the execution of queries. 
  Thanks ,
------=_Part_142242_16791070.1144313861245
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<P>Hello,</P>
<P>I am doing some test with differents values for the parameter maintenance_work_mem in order to</P>
<P>ameliorate the time for the creation of index and and the use of vacuum and analyse.</P>
<P>I read in the doc that this parameter is just for create index, vacuum and analyse and foreign key .</P>
<P>But when i test 2 queries with differents values the result are twice big :</P>
<P>for mwm to 64 Mo&nbsp;&nbsp; the query 1 last 34 min and the query 2&nbsp;&nbsp; 41 min</P>
<P>for mwm to 512 mo the query 1 last 17 min and the query 2 21 min</P>
<P>So my question is in what condition the parameter maintenance_work_mem influence on the execution of queries.&nbsp;</P>
<P>&nbsp; Thanks ,</P>
------=_Part_142242_16791070.1144313861245--