| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Disk-based hash aggregate's cost model |
| Date: | 2020-09-04 00:53:43 |
| Message-ID: | a0e8a1e42d377eba095d01a377bd99c1d7f11828.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2020-09-01 at 23:19 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> FWIW any thoughts about the different in temp size compared to
> CP_SMALL_TLIST?
Are you referring to results from a while ago? In this thread I don't
see what you're referring to.
I tried in a simple case on REL_13_STABLE, with and without the
CP_SMALL_TLIST change, and I saw only a tiny difference. Do you have a
current case that shows a larger difference?
The only thing I can think of that might change is the size of the null
bitmap or how fields are aligned.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-09-04 01:15:57 | Re: Switch to multi-inserts for pg_depend |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-09-04 00:51:13 | Re: 回复：how to create index concurrently on partitioned table |