From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Improving executor performance - tidbitmap |
Date: | 2016-07-17 21:49:41 |
Message-ID: | 20160717214941.bqolnfplr3fvqtnw@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016-07-17 08:32:17 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 11:06 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > The major issue with the simplehash implementation in the path is
> > probably the deletion; which should rather move cells around, rather
> > than use toombstones. But that was too complex for a POC ;). Also, it'd
> > likely need a proper iterator interface.
>
> Do we ever need to delete from a TIDBitmap? Probably not, but I'm
> guessing you have other uses for this in mind.
We do, via BitmapAnd.
> > FWIW, the dynahash usage in nodeAgg.c is a major bottleneck in a number
> > of other queries.
>
> Can we use this implementation for that as well, or are we going to
> need yet another one?
I've not tested it, but I'd assume that something like the simplehash
should work there. It's a bit more complicated of a scenario though.
Andres
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-07-17 22:46:30 | Re: Regression tests vs existing users in an installation |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2016-07-17 21:16:41 | Re: A Modest Upgrade Proposal |