Re: Possible typo in nodeAgg.c - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: Possible typo in nodeAgg.c
Date
Msg-id CAApHDvq=01dkHwD502oUiO9wc_Ke-hKv6JncHTfkm2o0uZObjg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Possible typo in nodeAgg.c  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 at 13:49, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 09:03:52AM +0000, Hou, Zhijie wrote:
> >       /*
> >        * Don't set the limit below 3/4 of hash_mem. In that case, we are at the
> >        * minimum number of partitions, so we aren't going to dramatically exceed
> > -      * work mem anyway.
> > +      * hash_mem anyway.
>
> Can someone comment on this?  Is the text change correct?

"work mem" is incorrect.  I'd prefer it if we didn't talk about
hash_mem as if it were a thing.  It's work_mem * hash_mem_multiplier.
Because of the underscore, using "hash_mem" to mean this makes it look
like we're talking about a variable by that name. Maybe it would be
better to refer to the variable name that's used to store the result
of get_hash_memory_limit(), i.e. hash_mem_limit. "the limit" should
likely use "*mem_limit" instead as there are multiple limits
mentioned.

It would also be better if this comment explained what's special about
4 * partition_mem. It seems to have nothing to do with the 3/4
mentioned in the comment.

David



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: Tab completion regression test failed on illumos
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: Tab completion regression test failed on illumos