Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 19:52:09 -0400
From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: Ed Tyrrill <tyrrill_ed@emc.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: 
Message-ID: <20070625235209.GG7531@tamriel.snowman.net>
Mail-Followup-To: Ed Tyrrill <tyrrill_ed@emc.com>,
	pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
References: <A23190A408F7094FAF446C1538222F76041E1C28@avaexch01.avamar.com>
	<20070625215654.GF7531@tamriel.snowman.net>
	<1182814742.6477.5.camel@nickel.avamar.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="saqwZB8dd8xoGD4q"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1182814742.6477.5.camel@nickel.avamar.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)


--saqwZB8dd8xoGD4q
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

* Ed Tyrrill (tyrrill_ed@emc.com) wrote:
> Yes, work_mem was set to 128MB for all runs.  All settings were the same
> except for the change to default_statistics_target.  I'm certainly
> memory constrained, but giving 2GB to one one session doesn't allow
> other sessions to do anything.  Possibly when we upgrade to 16GB. :-)

You might consider a smaller increase, say to 256MB, to see if that'll
switch it to a hash join (and then watch the *actual* memory usage, of
course), if you're looking for performance for this query at least.

Yeah, 2GB is what I typically run on our data warehouse box, which is a
nice dual-proc/dual-core DL385 w/ 16GB of ram. :)  The annoying thing is
that I can still run it out of memory sometimes, even w/ 16GB. :/

	Thanks,

		Stephen

--saqwZB8dd8xoGD4q
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGgFUprzgMPqB3kigRAvmLAJ98vNbgO8VZc0HYnz6ptxBCiOxf5ACfS1q1
vr3/uF/sudWq23MnhDk7aQM=
=I9Mj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--saqwZB8dd8xoGD4q--