From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Marina Polyakova <m(dot)polyakova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions |
Date: | 2018-03-27 17:29:48 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmobAttbu5QeDc68juR_is9G5up-DD3Jh=V45ZxxJ7Q3njg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:42 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 1:45 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> If we don't want to go with the upperrel logic, then maybe we should
>> consider just merging some of the other changes from my previous patch
>> in 0003* patch you have posted and then see if it gets rid of all the
>> cases where we are seeing a regression with this new approach.
>
> Which changes are you talking about?
I realized that this version could be optimized in the case where the
scanjoin_target and the topmost scan/join rel have the same
expressions in the target list. Here's a revised patch series that
does that. For me, this is faster than master on your last test case.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0004-Rewrite-the-code-that-applies-scan-join-targets-to-p.patch | application/octet-stream | 62.8 KB |
0003-Postpone-generate_gather_paths-for-topmost-scan-join.patch | application/octet-stream | 6.1 KB |
0002-CP_IGNORE_TLIST.patch | application/octet-stream | 6.5 KB |
0001-Teach-create_projection_plan-to-omit-projection-wher.patch | application/octet-stream | 3.5 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2018-03-27 17:31:46 | Re: Parallel Aggregates for string_agg and array_agg |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-03-27 17:29:14 | Re: Backend memory dump analysis |