From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jeevan Chalke <jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar(dot)raghuwanshi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise aggregation/grouping |
Date: | 2018-02-22 21:23:24 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZyQEjdBNuoG9-wC5GQ5GrO4544Myo13dVptvx+uLg9uQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 8:05 AM, Jeevan Chalke
<jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> In this attached version, I have rebased my changes over new design of
> partially_grouped_rel. The preparatory changes of adding
> partially_grouped_rel are in 0001.
I spent today hacking in 0001; results attached. The big change from
your version is that this now uses generate_gather_paths() to add
Gather/Gather Merge nodes (except in the case where we sort by group
pathkeys and then Gather Merge) rather than keeping all of the bespoke
code. That turned up to be a bit less elegant than I would have liked
-- I had to an override_rows argument to generate_gather_paths to make
it work. But overall I think this is still a big improvement, since
it lets us share code instead of duplicating it. Also, it potentially
lets us add partially-aggregated but non-parallel paths into
partially_grouped_rel->pathlist and that should Just Work; they will
get the Finalize Aggregate step but not the Gather. With your
arrangement that wouldn't work.
Please review/test.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
partially-grouped-rel-rmh.patch | application/octet-stream | 21.8 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2018-02-22 21:29:12 | Re: Hash Joins vs. Bloom Filters / take 2 |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2018-02-22 21:14:35 | Re: Hash Joins vs. Bloom Filters / take 2 |