On 8 Říjen 2013, 13:52, Atri Sharma wrote: > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Tomas Vondra <t...@fuzzy.cz> wrote: >> On 8 Říjen 2013, 11:42, Atri Sharma wrote: >>>> >>>> I've made some significant improvements in the chaining version (in >>>> the >>>> master branch), now getting about the memory consumption I've >>>> estimated. >>>> >>> I agree, we can hope to reduce the memory consumption by making changes >>> in >>> the current chaining implementation. I would like to look into changing >>> the data structure used for chaining from singly linked list to maybe >>> skip >>> list or something else. >> >> Just to be sure - I haven't been messing with the HashAggregate >> implementation directly, but with a custom aggregate. But feel free to >> tweak the built-in hash table ;-) >> >> Tomas >> > > Heh. > > Do you mind if I try it out on the custom agg you built? I assume it > is on the github repo link you shared?
Not at all, that's why I pushed that into a public repo. The "master" branch contains the regular chained hash table, the open addressing is in a separate branch (also in the repo). Tomas -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
