Re: HashAggregate slower than sort? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Kevin Grittner
Subject Re: HashAggregate slower than sort?
Date
Msg-id 4C1F289802000025000326B6@gw.wicourts.gov
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: HashAggregate slower than sort?  ("Jatinder Sangha" <js@coalition.com>)
List pgsql-performance
"Jatinder Sangha" <js@coalition.com> wrote:

> I've already converted all of my SQL to use "distinct on (...)"
> and this is now always faster using the hash-aggregates than when
> using sorting.  The queries now only use sorting if the hashing
> would take up too much memory.

It's great that you have a solution to your immediate problem, but
if the active portion of your database is really as fully cached as
your problem case indicates, you should probably still tweak the
costing factors.  Doing so will help the optimizer pick good plans
for any arbitrary query you choose to run.  If the caching was
unusual, and was just showing up because were repeatedly running
that one test case, then never mind.  :-)

-Kevin

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Jatinder Sangha"
Date:
Subject: Re: HashAggregate slower than sort?
Next
From: "Sergio Charpinel Jr."
Date:
Subject: Low perfomance SUM and Group by large databse