Re: Parallel query execution

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Gavin Flower <GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Parallel query execution
Date: 2013-01-17 02:44:53
Message-ID: 20130117024453.GB683@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 05:04:05PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 15, 2013, Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> * Gavin Flower (GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz) wrote:
> > How about being aware of multiple spindles - so if the requested
> > data covers multiple spindles, then data could be extracted in
> > parallel. This may, or may not, involve multiple I/O channels?
>
> Yes, this should dovetail with partitioning and tablespaces to pick up
> on exactly that.
>
>
> I'd rather not have the benefits of parallelism be tied to partitioning if we
> can help it. Hopefully implementing parallelism in core would result in
> something more transparent than that.

We will need a way to know we are not saturating the I/O channel with
random I/O that could have been sequential if it was single-threaded.
Tablespaces give us that info; not sure what else does.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Claudio Freire 2013-01-17 02:48:16 Re: [PATCH] COPY .. COMPRESSED
Previous Message Claudio Freire 2013-01-17 02:42:04 Re: Parallel query execution