Hi,
On 2020-03-21 17:45:31 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> Or, we can keep the 'additionalsize' argument but put it to work store
> the AggStatePerGroupData inline in the hash table. That would allow us
> to remove the 'additional' pointer from TupleHashEntryData, saving 8
> bytes plus the chunk header for every group. That sounds very tempting.
I don't see how? That'd require making the hash bucket addressing deal
with variable sizes, which'd be bad for performance reasons. Since there
can be a aggstate->numtrans AggStatePerGroupDatas for each hash table
entry, I don't see how to avoid a variable size?
> If we want to get even more clever, we could try to squish
> AggStatePerGroupData into 8 bytes by putting the flags
> (transValueIsNull and noTransValue) into unused bits of the Datum.
> That would work if the transtype is by-ref (low bits if pointer will
> be unused), or if the type's size is less than 8, or if the particular
> aggregate doesn't need either of those booleans. It would get messy,
> but saving 8 bytes per group is non-trivial.
I'm somewhat doubtful it's worth going for those per-type optimizations
- the wins don't seem large enough, relative to other per-group space
needs. Also adds additional instructions to fetching those values...
If we want to optimize memory usage, I think I'd first go for allocating
the group's "firstTuple" together with all the AggStatePerGroupDatas.
Greetings,
Andres Freund