On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 2:52 AM, Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Unfortunately it's been a bit trickier than I anticipated to get the > interprocess batch file sharing and hash table shrinking working > correctly and I don't yet have a new patch in good enough shape to > post in time for the January CF. More soon.
I noticed a bug in your latest revision: > + /* > + * In HJ_NEED_NEW_OUTER, we already selected the current inner batch for > + * reading from. If there is a shared hash table, we may have already > + * partially loaded the hash table in ExecHashJoinPreloadNextBatch. > + */ > + Assert(hashtable->batch_reader.batchno = curbatch); > + Assert(hashtable->batch_reader.inner); Obviously this isn't supposed to be an assignment. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers