From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | pgsql: Doc: Remove obsolete CREATE AGGREGATE note. |
Date: | 2020-07-29 00:00:13 |
Message-ID: | E1k0ZW1-0005Lv-CO@gemulon.postgresql.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers |
Doc: Remove obsolete CREATE AGGREGATE note.
The planner is in fact willing to use hash aggregation when work_mem is
not set high enough for everything to fit in memory. This has been the
case since commit 1f39bce0, which added disk-based hash aggregation.
There are a few remaining cases in which hash aggregation is avoided as
a matter of policy when the planner surmises that spilling will be
necessary. For example, callers of choose_hashed_setop() still
conservatively avoid hash aggregation when spilling is anticipated.
That doesn't seem like a good enough reason to mention hash aggregation
in this context.
Backpatch: 13-, where disk-based hash aggregation was introduced.
Branch
------
master
Details
-------
https://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/f36e82072c8866ba2eca08d88d1a5c3e0c3d1eb4
Modified Files
--------------
doc/src/sgml/ref/create_aggregate.sgml | 5 +----
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2020-07-29 00:15:30 | pgsql: Correct obsolete UNION hash aggs comment. |
Previous Message | David Rowley | 2020-07-28 23:43:37 | pgsql: Make EXPLAIN ANALYZE of HashAgg more similar to Hash Join |