From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Hash Joins vs. Bloom Filters / take 2 |
Date: | 2018-10-01 07:15:42 |
Message-ID: | 20181001071542.GJ11712@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 07:04:41PM -0500, David Steele wrote:
> After reviewing the thread I also agree that this should be pushed to
> 2018-09, so I have done so.
>
> I'm very excited by this patch, though. In general I agree with Peter that
> a higher rate of false positives is acceptable to save memory. I also don't
> see any reason why this can't be tuned with a parameter. Start with a
> conservative default and allow the user to adjust as desired.
Not much has happened since last March. The patch has conflicts in
regression tests. Thomas, you are registered as a reviewer of this
patch. Are you planning to look at it?
This is moved to next CF, waiting on author per the rotten bits.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-10-01 07:17:57 | Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-10-01 07:10:20 | Re: hostorder and failover_timeout for libpq |