From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Fabrízio Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Parallel Seq Scan |
Date: | 2015-04-21 21:20:08 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaUz3f-rujFpzB4EyQ8FgC2sdDAZpY=fpBvCXMk6y2-KQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:08 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 11:58 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
>> wrote:
>> > One disadvantage of retaining parallel-paths could be that it can
>> > increase the number of combinations planner might need to evaluate
>> > during planning (in particular during join path evaluation) unless we
>> > do some special handling to avoid evaluation of such combinations.
>>
>> Yes, that's true. But the overhead might not be very much. In the
>> common case, many baserels and joinrels will have no parallel paths
>> because the non-parallel paths is known to be better anyway. Also, if
>> parallelism does seem to be winning, we're probably planning a query
>> that involves accessing a fair amount of data,
>
> Am I understanding right that by above you mean to say that retain the
> parallel and non-parallel path only if parallel-path wins over non-parallel
> path?
Yes.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dean Rasheed | 2015-04-21 21:21:53 | Re: Row security violation error is misleading |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2015-04-21 21:07:52 | Re: Turning off HOT/Cleanup sometimes |