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 | 20170224072516.pifpksx4725rfv4t@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>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-02-24 01:59:01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: > > On 2017-02-23 17:28:26 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> 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. > > Yeah, I was wondering if we could get away with back-patching such a > change. In principle, nothing outside aset.c should know what's in the > header of an AllocBlock, but ... You'd need to go through a fair amount of intentional pain to be affected by a change AllocBlockData's structure. We could add the ->prev pointer to the end of AllocBlockData's definition to make it less likely that one would be affected in that unlikely case - but I'm a bit doubtful it's worth the trouble. - Andres
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: