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

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Possible typo in nodeAgg.c
Date
Msg-id ZURDnLIPVWXv0pVR@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Possible typo in nodeAgg.c  ("Hou, Zhijie" <houzj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>)
Responses Re: Possible typo in nodeAgg.c
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 09:03:52AM +0000, Hou, Zhijie wrote:
> Hi
> 
> In /src/backend/executor/nodeAgg.c
> 
> I found the following comment still use work mem,
> Since hash_mem has been introduced, Is it more accurate to use hash_mem here ?
> 
> @@ -1827,7 +1827,7 @@ hash_agg_set_limits(double hashentrysize, double input_groups, int used_bits,
>      /*
>       * 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?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  Only you can decide what is important to you.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: Why is DEFAULT_FDW_TUPLE_COST so insanely low?
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Three commit tips