On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:28 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> > I can't imagine that the server is avoiding hash aggregation on a 1MB
>> > work_mem limit for data that's a few dozen of bytes.  Is it really doing
>> > that?
>> Yup:
> Aha.  Thanks for testing.
>> Now that you mention it, this does seem a bit odd, although I remember
>> that there's a pretty substantial fudge factor in there when we have
>> no statistics (which we don't in this example).  If I ANALYZE ctv_data
>> then it sticks to the hashagg plan all the way down to 64kB work_mem.
> Hmm, so we could solve the complaint by adding an ANALYZE.  I'm open to
> that; other opinions?

We could just enforce work_mem to 64kB and then reset it.

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to