From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
Cc: | Tim Kane <tim(dot)kane(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Suggestion for concurrent index creation using a single full scan operation |
Date: | 2013-07-23 13:29:40 |
Message-ID: | 20130723132940.GI21996@alap2.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-07-23 14:17:13 +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
> We already do this in pg_restore by starting multiple worker processes.
> Those processes should get the benefit of synchronised sequential scans.
>
> The way the api for indexes works y wouldn't really be hard to start
> multiple parallel index builds. I'm not sure how well the pg_restore thing
> works and sometimes the goal isn't to maximise the speed so starting
> multiple processes isn't always ideal. It might sometimes be interesting
> to be able to do it explicit in a single process.
That's true for normal index modifications, but for ambuild (the initial
index creation function) much less so. That's pretty much a black box
from the outside. It's possible to change that, but it's certainly not
trivial.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2013-07-23 13:30:56 | Re: make --silent |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2013-07-23 13:29:11 | Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation |