From: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Mike Rylander" <mrylander(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> |
Subject: | Re: Support Parallel Query Execution in Executor |
Date: | 2006-04-08 17:16:08 |
Message-ID: | 36e682920604081016o39bca5al53344b24569a8fec@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On 4/8/06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> ... but I'm failing to follow where it says that parallel processing
> will fix that. All I can foresee in that direction is extra data
> transfer costs, bought at the price of portability and locking headaches.
I don't think it's any less portable than the system is now; It's just
enabling multiple slave processes to participate in scans and
processing (parallel query, parallel index builds, parallel sorts,
...) Likewise, the additional I/O cost isn't that much of an issue
because systems which really take advantage of this type of parallel
processing have large bandwidth I/O arrays anyway.
I didn't even want to mention that EVERY other database I know of
(Oracle, DB2, Sybase, SQL Server, Ingres, Bizgres MPP, MaxDB) supports
this, but it's a pretty obvious win for many environments.
--
Jonah H. Harris, Database Internals Architect
EnterpriseDB Corporation
732.331.1324
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Fuhr | 2006-04-08 17:26:19 | Re: How to implement oracle like rownum(function or seudocolumn) ? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-04-08 16:46:06 | Re: How to implement oracle like rownum(function or seudocolumn) ? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-04-08 17:16:39 | Re: bug in windows xp |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-04-08 16:27:19 | Re: bug in windows xp |