From: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Avoiding hash join batch explosions with extreme skew and weird stats |
Date: | 2019-05-16 23:46:12 |
Message-ID: | 20190516234612.53fvflxfwfwxinmp@development |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 06:58:43PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 4:39 AM Tomas Vondra
>> <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>> I kinda like the idea with increasing the spaceAllowed value. Essentially,
>>> if we decide adding batches would be pointless, increasing the memory
>>> budget is the only thing we can do anyway.
>
>> But that's not OK, we need to fix THAT.
>
>I don't think it's necessarily a good idea to suppose that we MUST
>fit in work_mem come what may. It's likely impossible to guarantee
>that in all cases. Even if we can, a query that runs for eons will
>help nobody.
>
I kinda agree with Thomas - arbitrarily increasing work_mem is something
we should not do unless abosolutely necessary. If the query is slow, it's
up to the user to bump the value up, if deemed appropriate.
regards
--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-05-16 23:52:50 | Re: PostgreSQL 12: Feature Highlights |
Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2019-05-16 23:05:02 | Re: Parallel Foreign Scans - need advice |