Hi, On 2018-06-04 10:32:47 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > Hash Aggs and SetOps are currently not spilled to disk. If the planner's > estimate on the number of entries is badly off, you might run out of memory > at execution time, if all the entries don't fit in memory. > > For HashAggs, this was discussed in depth a couple of years ago at [1]. > SetOps have the same issue, but fixing that is simpler, as you don't need to > handle arbitrary aggregate transition values and functions.
That part has gotten a bit easier since, because we have serialize / deserialize operations for aggregates these days. I wonder whether, at least for aggregates, the better fix wouldn't be to switch to feeding the tuples into tuplesort upon memory exhaustion and doing a sort based aggregate. We have most of the infrastructure to do that due to grouping sets. It's just the pre-existing in-memory tuples that'd be problematic, in that the current transition values would need to serialized as well. But with a stable sort that'd not be particularly problematic, and that could easily be achieved. Greetings, Andres Freund
