From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Avoiding hash join batch explosions with extreme skew and weird stats |
Date: | 2019-07-30 23:35:56 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYqA-w8gozqgxL_xQeh=08apAU-UU+wA2mtT95dJK4C5g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 2:47 PM Melanie Plageman
<melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I did the "needlessly dumb implementation" Robert mentioned, though,
> I thought about it and couldn't come up with a much smarter way to
> write match bits to a file. I think there might be an optimization
> opportunity in not writing the current_byte to the file each time that
> the outer tuple matches and only doing this once we have advanced to a
> tuple number that wouldn't have its match bit in the current_byte. I
> didn't do that to keep it simple, and, I suspect there might be a bit
> of gymnastics needed to make sure that that byte is actually written
> to the file in case we exit from some other state before we encounter
> the tuple represented in the last bit in that byte.
I mean, I was assuming we'd write in like 8kB blocks or something.
Doing it a byte at a time seems like it'd produce way too many
syscals.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-07-30 23:37:54 | Re: pgbench - implement strict TPC-B benchmark |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2019-07-30 23:31:54 | Re: pgbench - implement strict TPC-B benchmark |