Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From James Coleman
Subject Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort
Date
Msg-id CAAaqYe8DbOMmOLJoy8Q+u3AzwHLfnB+atb-b8+biBGoofRTfnQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 1:43 PM Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 03, 2020 at 12:17:22PM -0500, David Steele wrote:
>James and Tomas,
>
>On 1/21/20 10:03 AM, James Coleman wrote:
>>On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:58 AM Tomas Vondra
>><tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 09:37:01AM -0500, James Coleman wrote:
>>>>On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:25 AM Tomas Vondra
>>>><tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>This patch has been marked as WoA since end of November, and there has
>>>>>been no discussion/reviews since then :-( Based on off-list discussion
>>>>>with James I don't think that's going to change in this CF, so I'll move
>>>>>it to the next CF.
>>>>>
>>>>>I plan to work on the planner part of this patch before 2020-03, with
>>>>>the hope it can still make it into 13.
>>>>
>>>>In that off-list discussion I'd mentioned to Tomas that I would still
>>>>like to work on this, just my other responsibilities at work have left
>>>>me little time to work on the most important remaining part of this
>>>>(the planner parts) since that requires a fair amount of focus and
>>>>time.
>>>>
>>>>That being said, the patch also needs some more work on improving
>>>>EXPLAIN ANALYZE output (perhaps min/max/mean or median of
>>>>memory usage number of groups in each sort mode), and I think it's far
>>>>more feasible that I can tackle that piecemeal before the next CF.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Sure, sorry if that was not clear from my message - you're of course
>>>more than welcome to continue working on this. My understanding is that
>>>won't happen by the end of this CF, hence the move to 2020-03.
>>
>>Oh, yeah, I probably didn't word that reply well -- I just wanted to
>>add some additional detail to what you had already said.
>>
>>Thanks for your work on this!
>
>It doesn't look there has been much movement on this patch for the
>last few CFs.  Are one or both of you planning to work on this for
>v13? Or should we mark it for v14 and/or move it to the next CF.
>

I'm currently working on it, I plan to submit a new patch version
shortly - hopefully by the end of this week.

Tomas, thanks much for working on this.

I haven't had a lot of time to dedicate to this, but I do hope to soon (late this week or next), in addition to the planner stuff I believe Tomas is working on, push improvements to the EXPLAIN ANALYZE output.

James

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Kyotaro Horiguchi
Date:
Subject: Re: Asynchronous Append on postgres_fdw nodes.
Next
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_stat_progress_basebackup - progress reporting forpg_basebackup, in the server side