Re: Speeding up aggregates

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Speeding up aggregates
Date: 2002-12-06 21:42:46
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: pgsql-performance

Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> writes:
> This should also make it easier to implement all kinds of GROUP BY

> Do you have any near-term plans for doing them ?

Not me.

> Is there a variable to set that would disable one or another, like we
> currently have for disabling various join strategies ?

enable_hashagg. I didn't think about one to prevent the old style.

>> Note that even though there's no SORT, the sort_mem setting is used
>> to determine the allowable hashtable size, so a too-small sort_mem
>> might discourage the planner from selecting hashed aggregation.

> Do you mean that hashed aggregation can't overflow to disk, or would it
> just be too slow ?

I didn't write any code to let it overflow to disk --- didn't seem
likely to be useful. (You're probably better off with a sort-based
aggregation if there are too many distinct grouping keys.)

regards, tom lane

In response to


Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2002-12-06 21:49:58 Re: Speeding up aggregates
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2002-12-06 21:32:06 Re: Speeding up aggregates