Re: PoC: Partial sort

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Alexander Korotkov
Тема Re: PoC: Partial sort
Дата
Msg-id CAPpHfdvj1Tdi2WA64ZbBp5-yG-uzaRXzk3K7J7zt-cRX6YSd0A@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: PoC: Partial sort  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Ответы Re: PoC: Partial sort  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Re: PoC: Partial sort  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 8:02 AM, Alexander Korotkov
<aekorotkov@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hmm... I'm not completely agree with that. In typical usage partial sort
> should definitely use quicksort.  However, fallback to other sort methods is
> very useful.  Decision of partial sort usage is made by planner.  But
> planner makes mistakes.  For example, our HashAggregate is purely in-memory.
> In the case of planner mistake it causes OOM.  I met such situation in
> production and not once.  This is why I'd like partial sort to have graceful
> degradation for such cases.

I think that this should be moved to the next CF, unless a committer
wants to pick it up today.

Patch was rebased to current master.

------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company 
Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: CVE-2016-1238 fix breaks (at least) pg_rewind tests
Следующее
От: Fabien COELHO
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pgbench - allow to store select results into variables