Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From James Coleman
Subject Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort)
Date
Msg-id CAAaqYe_kpBUEkKXLRYfspu05p0wgj_n3_tORStDfCvLUpWUbRA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort)  (James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers


On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:37 AM James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com> wrote:
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.

I'm looking at this now, and realized that at least for parallel plans the current patch tracks the tuplesort instrumentation whether or not an EXPLAIN ANALYZE is in process.

Is this fairly standard for executor nodes? Or is it expected to condition some of this tracking based on whether or not an ANALYZE is running?

I'm found EXEC_FLAG_EXPLAIN_ONLY but no parallel for analyze. Similarly the InstrumentOption bit flags on the executor state seems to indicate whether specific ANALYZE options should be enabled, but I haven't yet seen anything conditioned solely on whether an ANALYZE is in flight. Could someone point me in the right direction is this is expected?

Thanks,
James

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: Berserk Autovacuum (let's save next Mandrill)
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Allowing ALTER TYPE to change storage strategy