From: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Dawid Kuroczko <qnex42(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: GROUP BY on a large table -- an idea |
Date: | 2006-10-12 09:57:26 |
Message-ID: | 20061012095726.GC11723@svana.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 09:52:11AM +0200, Dawid Kuroczko wrote:
> Recently I've been playing with quite a big table (over 50mln rows),
> and did some SELECT ... sum(...) WHERE ... GROUP BY ... queries.
>
> The usual plan for these is to sort the entries according to GROUP BY
> specification, then to run aggregates one by one. If the data to be
> sorted is large enough, PostgreSQL has no other option than to spill
> to disk, which well, Isn't the fastest...
<snip>
Sounds an awful lot like the HashAggregate nodetype which has existed
since at least 7.4. It has a hashtable of "keys" with attached
"states".
Hope this helps,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2006-10-12 10:30:30 | Re: Patch for Win32 blocking problem |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2006-10-12 09:35:47 | Re: Hints WAS: Index Tuning Features |