| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Taylor Vesely <tvesely(at)pivotal(dot)io>, Adam Lee <ali(at)pivotal(dot)io>, Melanie Plageman <mplageman(at)pivotal(dot)io>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Memory-Bounded Hash Aggregation |
| Date: | 2020-02-22 18:00:20 |
| Message-ID: | 20200222180020.ej5gvfcaf2semgji@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2020-02-22 09:55:26 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-02-21 at 12:22 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I'd also like to apply something like 0013 from that thread, I find
> > the
> > whole curperagg, select_current_set, curaggcontext logic confusing as
> > hell. I'd so far planned to put this on the backburner until this
> > patch
> > has been committed, to avoid breaking it. But perhaps that's not the
> > right call?
>
> At least for now, I appreciate you holding off on those a bit.
Both patches, or just 0013? Seems the earlier one might make the
addition of the opcodes you add less verbose?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2020-02-22 19:02:16 | Re: Memory-Bounded Hash Aggregation |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2020-02-22 17:55:26 | Re: Memory-Bounded Hash Aggregation |