On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 3:24 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I have some patches sitting around in my workspace that I think are > non-controversial, and so I was considering just pushing them once > the tree opens for v11 development. If anyone thinks they need > further review, I'll put them into the September commitfest, but > otherwise we might as well skip the overhead. These are: > > 1. check-hash-bucket-size-against-work_mem-2.patch from > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/13698.1487283...@sss.pgh.pa.us > > That discussion sort of trailed off, but there wasn't really anyone > saying not to commit it, and no new ideas have surfaced.
+1 I'd vote for including this in v10. There doesn't seem to be any downside to this: it's a no brainer to avoid our exploding hash table case when we can see it coming. -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers