Hi,
On 2018-06-04 10:32:47 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Hash Aggs and SetOps are currently not spilled to disk. If the planner's
> estimate on the number of entries is badly off, you might run out of memory
> at execution time, if all the entries don't fit in memory.
>
> For HashAggs, this was discussed in depth a couple of years ago at [1].
> SetOps have the same issue, but fixing that is simpler, as you don't need to
> handle arbitrary aggregate transition values and functions.
That part has gotten a bit easier since, because we have serialize /
deserialize operations for aggregates these days.
I wonder whether, at least for aggregates, the better fix wouldn't be to
switch to feeding the tuples into tuplesort upon memory exhaustion and
doing a sort based aggregate. We have most of the infrastructure to do
that due to grouping sets. It's just the pre-existing in-memory tuples
that'd be problematic, in that the current transition values would need
to serialized as well. But with a stable sort that'd not be
particularly problematic, and that could easily be achieved.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
