| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>, Luke Lonergan <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Eng <eng(at)intranet(dot)greenplum(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: old synchronized scan patch |
| Date: | 2006-12-06 23:01:54 |
| Message-ID: | 1165446114.2048.61.camel@dogma.v10.wvs |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2006-12-06 at 19:55 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-12-06 at 11:46 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
>
> > If you make the join/leave operations such that there is no resistance
> > at all (no timeout or anything), then it becomes the same as my non-
> > synchronized proposal, right?
>
> Teamwork requires some synchronisation to be effective, but yeh there
> needs to be a way to leave the Conga if its not working for you/them.
>
> I think we need the synchronisation to make concurrent scans effective,
> plus Brownian Scans doesnt have the same ring to it :-)
How about "Scan Hinting", or "Smart Scans"?
Although, "smart" might be too strong a word ;)
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2006-12-06 23:04:13 | Re: SQL/PSM implemenation for PostgreSQL (roadmap) |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2006-12-06 22:27:36 | Re: old synchronized scan patch |