From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Paul Ramsey <pramsey(at)cleverelephant(dot)ca> |
Cc: | Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Parallel Queries and PostGIS |
Date: | 2016-03-28 16:45:43 |
Message-ID: | 20160328164543.GT3127@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Paul,
* Paul Ramsey (pramsey(at)cleverelephant(dot)ca) wrote:
> I spent some time over the weekend trying out the different modes of
> parallel query (seq scan, aggregate, join) in combination with PostGIS
> and have written up the results here:
>
> http://blog.cleverelephant.ca/2016/03/parallel-postgis.html
Neat!
Regarding aggregate parallelism and the cascaded union approach, though
I imagine in other cases as well, it seems like having a
"final-per-worker" function for aggregates would be useful.
Without actually looking at the code at all, it seems like that wouldn't
be terribly difficult to add.
Would you agree that it'd be helpful to have for making the st_union()
work better in parallel?
Though I do wonder if you would end up wanting to have a different
final() function in that case..
Thanks!
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Paul Ramsey | 2016-03-28 17:01:36 | Re: Parallel Queries and PostGIS |
Previous Message | Paul Ramsey | 2016-03-28 16:18:56 | Parallel Queries and PostGIS |