Re: Disk-based hash aggregate's cost model
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Disk-based hash aggregate's cost model |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAH2-Wz=Kf1q5ZSnjrfjrmkCUy+sjKpEpi014i8ZYG2PyJ7_4xA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Disk-based hash aggregate's cost model (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 2:19 AM Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > FWIW I suspect some of this difference may be due to logical vs. > physical I/O. iosnoop only tracks physical I/O sent to the device, but > maybe we do much more logical I/O and it simply does not expire from > page cache for the sort. It might behave differently for larger data > set, longer query, ... There is also the fact that the LogicalTapeSetBlocks() instrumentation is known to have problems that we still need to fix: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAH2-Wzn5PCBLUrrds=hD439LtWP+PD7ekRTd=8LdtqJ+KO5D1Q@mail.gmail.com I'm not suggesting that this is a significant factor here. But I can't rule it out just yet either. > I don't know. I certainly understand the desire not to change things > this late. OTOH I'm worried that we'll end up receiving a lot of poor > plans post release. I think that this needs to get fixed before release. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: