Re: [HACKERS] Poor memory context performance in large hash joins
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Poor memory context performance in large hash joins |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20170224064744.veq4et4imuzhdrbm@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Poor memory context performance in large hash joins (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Poor memory context performance in large hash joins
Re: [HACKERS] Poor memory context performance in large hash joins Re: [HACKERS] Poor memory context performance in large hash joins |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-02-23 17:28:26 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> writes: > > The number of new chunks can be almost as as large as the number of old > > chunks, especially if there is a very popular value. The problem is that > > every time an old chunk is freed, the code in aset.c around line 968 has to > > walk over all the newly allocated chunks in the linked list before it can > > find the old one being freed. This is an N^2 operation, and I think it has > > horrible CPU cache hit rates as well. > > Maybe it's time to convert that to a doubly-linked list. Yes, I do think so. Given that we only have that for full blocks, not for small chunks, the cost seems neglegible. That would also, partially, address the performance issue http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/d15dff83-0b37-28ed-0809-95a5cc7292ad%402ndquadrant.com addresses, in a more realistically backpatchable manner. Jeff, do you have a handy demonstrator? > Although if the > hash code is producing a whole lot of requests that are only a bit bigger > than the separate-block threshold, I'd say It's Doing It Wrong. It should > learn to aggregate them into larger requests. That's probably right, but we can't really address that in the back-branches. And to me this sounds like something we should address in the branches, not just in master. Even if we'd also fix the hash-aggregation logic, I think such an O(n^2) behaviour in the allocator is a bad idea in general, and we should fix it anyway. Regards, Andres
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: