Re: 9.6beta, parallel execution and cpu_tuple_cost

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 9.6beta, parallel execution and cpu_tuple_cost
Date: 2016-05-27 13:48:48
Message-ID: 32610.1464356928@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> while playing around with the parallel aggregates and seq scan in 9.6beta I noticed that Postgres will stop using parallel plans when cpu_tuple_cost is set to a very small number.

If you don't reduce the parallel-plan cost factors proportionally,
it's not very surprising that reducing that would tend to bias the
planner away from using parallel plans. See parallel_setup_cost and
parallel_tuple_cost.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Kellerer 2016-05-27 14:23:46 Re: 9.6beta, parallel execution and cpu_tuple_cost
Previous Message Sameer Kumar 2016-05-27 13:31:57 Re: 9.6beta, parallel execution and cpu_tuple_cost