Re: Eager aggregation, take 3
От | Richard Guo |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Eager aggregation, take 3 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAMbWs4-Q-CHadH1ub_oAv3sJ_NHt0GUO4nce3LBhpPmp1v6Z_Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Eager aggregation, take 3 (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Eager aggregation, take 3
Re: Eager aggregation, take 3 |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 9:01 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 11:57 PM Tender Wang <tndrwang@gmail.com> wrote: > > I haven't look all of them. I just pick few simple plan test(e.g. 19.sql, 45.sql). > > For example, 19.sql, eager agg pushdown doesn't get large gain, but a little > > performance regress. > > Yeah, this is one of the things I was worried about in my previous > reply to Richard. It would be worth Richard, or someone, probing into > exactly why that's happening. My fear is that we just don't have good > enough estimates to make good decisions, but there might well be > another explanation. It's great that we have a query to probe into. Your guess is likely correct: it may be caused by poor estimates. Tender, would you please help provide the outputs of EXPLAIN (COSTS ON, ANALYZE) on 19.sql with and without eager aggregation? > > I will continue to do benchmark on this feature. Thanks again for running the benchmarks. Thanks Richard
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: