|From:||Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>|
|To:||Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, Gavin Flower <GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: POC: GROUP BY optimization|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 01:28:59PM +0400, Pavel Borisov wrote:
> > Thanks for your interest! FYI there is a new thread about this topic 
> > with the next version of the patch and more commentaries (I've created
> > it for visibility purposes, but probably it also created some confusion,
> > sorry for that).
> > Thanks!
> I made a very quick look at your updates and noticed that it is intended to
> be simple and some parts of the code are removed as they have little test
> coverage. I'd propose vice versa to increase test coverage to enjoy more
> precise cost calculation and probably partial grouping.
> Or maybe it's worth to benchmark both patches and then re-decide what we
> want more to have a more complicated or a simpler version.
> Good to know that this feature is not stuck anymore and we have more than
> one proposal.
Just to clarify, the patch that I've posted in another thread mentioned
above is not an alternative proposal, but a development of the same
patch I had posted in this thread. As mentioned in , reduce of
functionality is an attempt to reduce the scope, and as soon as the base
functionality looks good enough it will be returned back.
|Next Message||Muhammad Usama||2020-10-26 10:52:46||Re: pgbench - add pseudo-random permutation function|
|Previous Message||Pavel Borisov||2020-10-26 09:28:59||Re: POC: GROUP BY optimization|