Re: Request more documentation for incompatibility of parallelism and plpgsql exec_run_select

From: Mark Dilger <hornschnorter(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Request more documentation for incompatibility of parallelism and plpgsql exec_run_select
Date: 2017-06-30 13:32:42
Message-ID: 2B6CEE2F-A9C5-47DE-856F-D191F5160036@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> On Jun 29, 2017, at 8:55 PM, Mark Dilger <hornschnorter(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> Changing myfunc to create a temporary table, to execute the sql to populate
> that temporary table, and to then loop through the temporary table's rows
> fixes the problem. For the real-world example where I hit this, that single
> change decreases the runtime from 13.5 seconds to 2.5 seconds.

Actually, this is wrong. On further review, by the time I had changed the
function definition, the data in the test server I was querying had likely changed
enough for the performance to change. That duped me into thinking I had
found a work-around. I can no longer reproduce any performance improvement
in this manner.

mark

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alex K 2017-06-30 13:42:06 Re: Parallel COPY FROM execution
Previous Message Yugo Nagata 2017-06-30 13:17:15 Re: Fix doc of DROP SUBSCRIPTION