From: Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Excessive disk usage in WindowAgg
Message-ID: <87a7ator8n.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (berkeley-unix)
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 12:49:54 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

This one just came up on IRC:

create table tltest(a integer, b text, c text, d text);
insert into tltest
  select i, repeat('foo',100), repeat('foo',100), repeat('foo',100)
    from generate_series(1,100000) i;
set log_temp_files=0;
set client_min_messages=log;

select count(a+c) from (select a, count(*) over () as c from tltest s1) s;
LOG:  temporary file: path "base/pgsql_tmp/pgsql_tmp82513.3", size 92600000

Using 92MB of disk for one integer seems excessive; the reason is clear
from the explain:

                                                            QUERY PLAN                                                            
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Aggregate  (cost=16250.00..16250.01 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=1236.260..1236.260 rows=1 loops=1)
   Output: count((tltest.a + (count(*) OVER (?))))
   ->  WindowAgg  (cost=0.00..14750.00 rows=100000 width=12) (actual time=1193.846..1231.216 rows=100000 loops=1)
         Output: tltest.a, count(*) OVER (?)
         ->  Seq Scan on public.tltest  (cost=0.00..13500.00 rows=100000 width=4) (actual time=0.006..14.361 rows=100000 loops=1)
               Output: tltest.a, tltest.b, tltest.c, tltest.d

so the whole width of the table is being stored in the tuplestore used
by the windowagg.

In create_windowagg_plan, we have:

    /*
     * WindowAgg can project, so no need to be terribly picky about child
     * tlist, but we do need grouping columns to be available
     */
    subplan = create_plan_recurse(root, best_path->subpath, CP_LABEL_TLIST);

Obviously we _do_ need to be more picky about this; it seems clear that
using CP_SMALL_TLIST | CP_LABEL_TLIST would be a win in many cases.
Opinions?

-- 
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)