Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: wip: functions median and percentile

From: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: wip: functions median and percentile
Date: 2010-10-11 17:42:10
Message-ID: AANLkTintCTk8r0jRM0rvY8h4FO=QHVNhXArKE6CL6AqQ@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-rrreviewers
On 11 October 2010 18:37, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> The estimate of 200 x 8K is below work_mem, so it uses a hash
>> aggregate. In reality, each tuplesort allocates around 30K initially,
>> so it very quickly uses over 1GB. A better estimate for the aggregate
>> wouldn't improve this situation much.
>
> Sure it would: an estimate of 30K would keep the planner from using
> hash aggregation.
>

Not if work_mem was 10MB.

Regards,
Dean

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Craig JamesDate: 2010-10-11 17:46:17
Subject: Re: Slow count(*) again...
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-10-11 17:37:11
Subject: Re: wip: functions median and percentile

pgsql-rrreviewers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-10-11 17:48:12
Subject: Re: wip: functions median and percentile
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-10-11 17:37:11
Subject: Re: wip: functions median and percentile

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group