From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
---|---|
To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Default setting for enable_hashagg_disk |
Date: | 2020-07-27 15:38:21 |
Message-ID: | CAH2-WznKb9aT2nbUVJnF1qCqYJ+HAj2C2UHe5B_DJqANoAOCmg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 11:34 AM Tomas Vondra
<tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> That's 1.6GB, if I read it right. Which is more than 200MB ;-)
Sigh. That solves that "mystery": the behavior that my sorted vs
random example exhibited is a known limitation in hash aggs that spill
(and an acceptable one). The memory usage is reported on accurately by
EXPLAIN ANALYZE.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2020-07-27 17:30:29 | Re: Default setting for enable_hashagg_disk |
Previous Message | PG Doc comments form | 2020-07-27 14:47:07 | Typo in the Section "3.6. Inheritance" |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Page | 2020-07-27 16:00:17 | Re: Display individual query in pg_stat_activity |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2020-07-27 15:30:36 | Re: hashagg slowdown due to spill changes |