On 20/11/2020 08:31, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 08:47:51AM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Yeah, I believe it's always been like that. Yeah, arguably it should be
backpatched. I felt conservative and didn't backpatch, but feel free to do
it if you think it should be.
+1 fo
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 08:47:51AM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Yeah, I believe it's always been like that. Yeah, arguably it should be
> backpatched. I felt conservative and didn't backpatch, but feel free to do
> it if you think it should be.
+1 for a backpatch. The difference in runtime
On 19/11/2020 07:20, Greg Stark wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 at 05:40, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 13/11/2020 18:10, Alexey Bashtanov wrote:
I would appreciate if someone could have a look at the patch attached,
which makes executor skip initializing hash tables when doing explain only.
Mak
On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 at 05:40, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
> On 13/11/2020 18:10, Alexey Bashtanov wrote:
>> > I would appreciate if someone could have a look at the patch attached,
> > which makes executor skip initializing hash tables when doing explain only.
>
> Makes sense. Committed, thanks fo
On 13/11/2020 18:10, Alexey Bashtanov wrote:
Hi,
I got somewhat scared when my explain took a few seconds to complete and
used a few gigs of RAM.
To reproduce try the following:
discard temp;
create temp table a as select to_timestamp(generate_series(1, 7000)) i;
analyze a;
set work_mem to '3GB
Hi,
I got somewhat scared when my explain took a few seconds to complete and
used a few gigs of RAM.
To reproduce try the following:
discard temp;
create temp table a as select to_timestamp(generate_series(1, 7000)) i;
analyze a;
set work_mem to '3GB';
explain select distinct a1.i - a2.i from
