| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Reduce TupleHashEntryData struct size by half |
| Date: | 2025-01-13 22:11:18 |
| Message-ID: | 6f61828ad7381fc03492cef267f896e99d38ead4.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 2025-01-12 at 14:54 +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> While I do understand the desire to reduce Hash Agg's memory usage,
> has this really been through enough performance testing to be getting
> committed?
Perhaps not. I'm going to revert it while we sort it out, and hopefully
we can find a solution because it's a substantial memory savings.
> I wonder if there's some other better way of doing this. Would it be
> worth having some function like ExecCopySlotMinimalTuple() that
> accepts an additional parameter so that the palloc allocates N more
> bytes at the end? Maybe it's worth hunting around to see if there's
> any other executor nodes that could benefit from that infrastructure.
That would be convenient, but doesn't seem like a great separation of
responsibilities. Perhaps some API that separated the length
calculation, and accepted a caller-supplied buffer?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2025-01-13 22:33:41 | Re: Reorder shutdown sequence, to flush pgstats later |
| Previous Message | Michail Nikolaev | 2025-01-13 21:58:00 | Re: Issues with ON CONFLICT UPDATE and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |