"Timothy J. Kordas" <tkordas(at)greenplum(dot)com> writes:
> Am I missing something about the current implementation ?
If the planner has correctly predicted the number of rows, the table
loading should be about NTUP_PER_BUCKET in either regime. Are you
sure you aren't just wishing that NTUP_PER_BUCKET were smaller?
I don't see that making the hashtable much larger than ntuples
is a good idea --- that just spreads out the live entries over more
cache lines, resulting in more cache thrashing.
regards, tom lane