Re: Performance Issue on Query 18 of TPC-H Benchmark
| От | Andrei Lepikhov |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Performance Issue on Query 18 of TPC-H Benchmark |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 44b42d35-2283-4a7f-aa2d-a9abe2dcf1b6@gmail.com обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Performance Issue on Query 18 of TPC-H Benchmark (Ba Jinsheng <bajinsheng@u.nus.edu>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Performance Issue on Query 18 of TPC-H Benchmark
|
| Список | pgsql-bugs |
On 10/16/24 01:28, Ba Jinsheng wrote: > The major differerence between both query plans is the first one has > additional *SORT*. I believe the second query plan is more efficient. > Similar to my last report, perhaps we can optimize code to enable it. I would like to know if you can improve that case by switching from the sorted group to a hashed one. I see huge underestimation because of the HAVING clause on an aggregate. It would be interesting to correct the prediction and observe what will happen. Can you reproduce the same query using the SQL server? It would highlight some techniques Postgres has not adopted yet. -- regards, Andrei Lepikhov
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: