Re: WIP: [[Parallel] Shared] Hash

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Rafia Sabih <rafia(dot)sabih(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP: [[Parallel] Shared] Hash
Date: 2017-03-07 21:41:25
Message-ID: 20170307214125.2lsnypqwcemgguon@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2017-03-07 02:57:30 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> I'm not sure why nodeHashjoin.c is doing raw batchfile read/write
> operations anyway; why not use tuplestore.c for that (as
> tuplestore.c's comments incorrectly say is the case)?

Another reason presumably is that using tuplestores would make it harder
to control the amount of memory used - we do *not* want an extra set of
work_mem used here, right?

- Andres

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sven R. Kunze 2017-03-07 21:43:16 Re: SQL/JSON in PostgreSQL
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2017-03-07 21:38:19 Re: Statement-level rollback