Re: [PERFORM] Hash Anti Join performance degradation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Cédric Villemain
Subject Re: [PERFORM] Hash Anti Join performance degradation
Date
Msg-id BANLkTikDKUF53_MhP-T9y9NM7a8z40djXA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PERFORM] Hash Anti Join performance degradation  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [PERFORM] Hash Anti Join performance degradation
List pgsql-hackers
2011/6/1 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:43 PM, Cédric Villemain
> <cedric.villemain.debian@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes, while here I noticed that the query was long to be killed.
>> I added a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPT() in the for(;;) loop in nodeHashjoin.c.
>> It fixes the delay when trying to kill but I don't know about
>> performance impact this can have in this place of the code.
>
> Well, seems easy enough to find out: just test the query with and
> without your patch (and without casserts).  If there's no measurable
> difference on this query, there probably won't be one anywhere

Oh damned, I am currently with an eeepc, I'll need 2 days to bench that :-D
I'll see tomorow.
.
>
> --
> Robert Haas
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>



--
Cédric Villemain               2ndQuadrant
http://2ndQuadrant.fr/     PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Brendan Jurd
Date:
Subject: Re: [DOCS] DOCS: SGML identifier may not exceed 44 characters
Next
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #6046: select current_date crashes postgres