Re: Huge performance penalty with parallel queries in Windows x64 v. Linux x64

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Hans Buschmann <buschmann(at)nidsa(dot)net>
Cc: "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Huge performance penalty with parallel queries in Windows x64 v. Linux x64
Date: 2021-05-04 10:42:17
Message-ID: CA+hUKGLOWBYU9d_mAN9v29gu12-TWj5QT+=8XrP4ojyABZ-TQw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 7:40 PM Hans Buschmann <buschmann(at)nidsa(dot)net> wrote:
> The problem seems that this (probably inherent) performance disadvantage of windows is not reflected in the cost model.

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/13/runtime-config-query.html#GUC-PARALLEL-SETUP-COST
is for that.

It might be interesting to do some profiling to see exactly what is
slow. Presumably CreateProcess(), but I wonder why exactly.

It'd be nice if we had a way to reuse parallel workers, but alas we do
not, yet. Or threads.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2021-05-04 12:25:58 Re: pg_restore - generated column - not populating
Previous Message Pól Ua Laoínecháin 2021-05-04 09:52:09 Re: Is this the future of I/O for the RDBMS?