Re: BUG #16104: Invalid DSA Memory Alloc Request in Parallel Hash
От | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #16104: Invalid DSA Memory Alloc Request in Parallel Hash |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20191110234438.qwdcur3aodd7yj6d@development обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #16104: Invalid DSA Memory Alloc Request in Parallel Hash (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #16104: Invalid DSA Memory Alloc Request in Parallel Hash
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 02:46:31PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote: >Hi, > >On 2019-11-10 22:50:17 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote: >> On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 10:23:52PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote: >> > On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 10:08:58AM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote: >> > Can't we simply compute two hash values, using different seeds - one for >> > bucket and the other for batch? Of course, that'll be more expensive. >> >> Meh, I realized that's pretty much just a different way to get 64-bit >> hashes (which is what you mentioned). > >I'm not sure it's really the same, given practical realities in >postgres. Right now the "extended" hash function supporting 64 bit hash >functions is optional. So we couldn't unconditionally rely on it being >present, even in master, unless we're prepared to declare it as >required from now on. > >So computing two different hash values at the same time, by using a >different IV and a different combine function, doesn't seem like an >unreasonable approach. > True. I was commenting on the theoretical fact that computing two 32-bit hashes is close to computing a 64-bit hash, but you're right there are implementation details that may make it more usable in our case. regards -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: