From: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: HashAgg's batching counter starts at 0, but Hash's starts at 1. |
Date: | 2020-07-27 02:54:02 |
Message-ID: | 20200727025402.GL4286@telsasoft.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 10:48:45AM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 18:46, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 7:04 PM David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Does anyone have any objections to that being changed?
> >
> > That's OK with me. By the way, I'm on vacation and will catch up on these HashAgg threads next week.
>
> (Adding Justin as I know he's expressed interest in the EXPLAIN output
> of HashAgg before)
Thanks.
It's unrelated to hashAgg vs hashJoin, but I also noticed that this is shown
only conditionally:
if (es->format != EXPLAIN_FORMAT_TEXT)
{
if (es->costs && aggstate->hash_planned_partitions > 0)
{
ExplainPropertyInteger("Planned Partitions", NULL,
aggstate->hash_planned_partitions, es);
That was conditional since it was introduced at 1f39bce02:
if (es->costs && aggstate->hash_planned_partitions > 0)
{
ExplainPropertyInteger("Planned Partitions", NULL,
aggstate->hash_planned_partitions, es);
}
I think 40efbf870 should've handled this, too.
--
Justin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2020-07-27 03:27:34 | Re: INSERT INTO SELECT, Why Parallelism is not selected? |
Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2020-07-27 02:45:47 | Re: Fast DSM segments |