From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: why not parallel seq scan for slow functions |
Date: | 2017-08-15 13:45:42 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoY409erwRzj-pBeE1vzD2dafBFiqWw8dNS5Uu8kdjVefg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I think skipping a generation of gather paths for scan node or top
> level join node generated via standard_join_search seems straight
> forward, but skipping for paths generated via geqo seems to be tricky
> (See use of generate_gather_paths in merge_clump). Assuming, we find
> some way to skip it for top level scan/join node, I don't think that
> will be sufficient, we have some special way to push target list below
> Gather node in apply_projection_to_path, we need to move that part as
> well in generate_gather_paths.
I don't think that can work, because at that point we don't know what
target list the upper node wants to impose.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-08-15 13:46:09 | Re: [HACKERS] [postgresql 10 beta3] unrecognized node type: 90 |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-08-15 13:40:27 | Re: scan on inheritance parent with no children in current session |