Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Decide on default DuckDB configuration that makes sense for use in postgres #217

Closed
4 tasks
JelteF opened this issue Sep 24, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #338
Closed
4 tasks

Decide on default DuckDB configuration that makes sense for use in postgres #217

JelteF opened this issue Sep 24, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #338
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@JelteF
Copy link
Collaborator

JelteF commented Sep 24, 2024

Related to but separate from #216

@JelteF
Copy link
Collaborator Author

JelteF commented Oct 16, 2024

Moving this to stability testing

@wuputah
Copy link
Collaborator

wuputah commented Oct 21, 2024

I believe this was the output of the discussion today:

  • 4gb
  • unbounded (default) threads
  • max 1 thread per Postgres scan?

JelteF added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 23, 2024
Fixes #217 

This changes the defaults for `duckdb.max_memory` and
`duckdb.disabled_filesystems` to the agreed upon settings. While doing
that I found two issues that this also fixes:
1. `duckdb.disabled_filesystems = 'LocalFilesystem'` was basically a way
to make DuckDB execution unusable, due to us doing file system access
when initializing the database/connection. So now we enable the setting
later. Also we now don't call `INSTALL {extension}` during connection
initialization anymore.
2. #316 didn't fix the loading of extensions when
`duckdb.install_extension()` was called. Only for direct inserts to the
`duckdb.extensions` table. That's fixed by not using the low-level
`CatalogTupleInsert`, and instead switching to SPI.
3. Postgres superusers should not be restricted by
`duckdb.disabled_filesystems`, they should be able to do whatever they
want. So now this setting is not actually configured for superusers
anymore.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants