Re: MergeJoin beats HashJoin in the case of multiple hash clauses
От | Tender Wang |
---|---|
Тема | Re: MergeJoin beats HashJoin in the case of multiple hash clauses |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAHewXNnZgRPhX06-y+67=h75mfbJjVmtK=28xHwFxfcyK4o0-g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: MergeJoin beats HashJoin in the case of multiple hash clauses (Tender Wang <tndrwang@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tender Wang <tndrwang@gmail.com> 于2025年4月24日周四 22:07写道:
Tender Wang <tndrwang@gmail.com> 于2025年4月14日周一 14:17写道:Hi,While I debug hashjoin codes, in estimate_multivariate_bucketsize(), I find thatthe list_copy(hashclauses) below is unnecessary if we have a single join clause.List *clauses = list_copy(hashclauses);...I adjust the place of list_copy() call as the attached patch.This can save some overhead of function calls and memory copies.Any thoughts?Hi Alexander,In the last thread, I found a minor optimization for the code in estimate_multivariate_bucketsize().Adjust the place of list_copy() at the start of estimate_multivariate_bucketsize, and we can avoid unnecessarily creating a new listand memory copy if we have only a single hash clause.Do you think it's worth doing this?
Hi all,
I have added this patch to commitfest[1]. I'm hoping someone can review it for me.
Thanks,
Tender Wang
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: