On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Yang Zhang <yanghatespam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Yang Zhang <yanghatespam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> This isn't some microbenchmark. This is part of our actual analytical >>> application. We're running large-scale graph partitioning algorithms. >> >> It's important to see how it runs if you can fit more / most of the >> data set into memory by cranking up work_mem to something really big >> (like a gigabyte or two) and if the query planner can switch to some >> sort of hash algorithm. > > We're actually using a very small dataset right now. Being bounded by > memory capacity is not a scalable approach for our application. But the more you can fit into work_mem the faster it will go anyway. So it's still worth a try. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
