Re: hash agg is slower on wide tables? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: hash agg is slower on wide tables?
Date
Msg-id 15176.1424617111@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: hash agg is slower on wide tables?  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: hash agg is slower on wide tables?
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> I've wondered before if we shouldn't use the caching via
> slot->tts_values so freely - if you only use a couple values from a wide
> tuple the current implementation really sucks if those few aren't at the
> beginning of the tuple.

Don't see how you expect to get a win that way.  Visiting column k
requires crawling over columns 1..k-1 in practically all cases.
You could maybe save a cycle or so by omitting the physical store
into the Datum array, assuming that you never did need the column
value later ... but the extra bookkeeping for more complicated
tracking of which columns had been extracted would eat that savings
handily.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: SSL renegotiation
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Enforce creation of destination folders for source files in pg_regress (Was: pg_regress writes into source tree)