From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: WIP: [[Parallel] Shared] Hash |
Date: | 2017-01-02 02:17:12 |
Message-ID: | CAM3SWZRQMDyZ5t1+q4o+hwe7fAjOffvtyAjx=rWOXemBcw+6Sw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 2:52 AM, Thomas Munro
<thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Unfortunately it's been a bit trickier than I anticipated to get the
> interprocess batch file sharing and hash table shrinking working
> correctly and I don't yet have a new patch in good enough shape to
> post in time for the January CF. More soon.
I noticed a bug in your latest revision:
> + /*
> + * In HJ_NEED_NEW_OUTER, we already selected the current inner batch for
> + * reading from. If there is a shared hash table, we may have already
> + * partially loaded the hash table in ExecHashJoinPreloadNextBatch.
> + */
> + Assert(hashtable->batch_reader.batchno = curbatch);
> + Assert(hashtable->batch_reader.inner);
Obviously this isn't supposed to be an assignment.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2017-01-02 03:22:29 | Re: rewrite HeapSatisfiesHOTAndKey |
Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2017-01-02 02:06:46 | Re: proposal: session server side variables |