From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(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: | 2017-11-05 04:57:56 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1+1H5Urm0_Wp-n5XszdLX1YXBqS_zW0f-vvWKwdh3eCJA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 2:35 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 9:15 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 3:05 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Thomas Munro
>> > <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > The attached patch fixes both the review comments as discussed above.
>> >
>> >
>> > that should be fixed by turning costs on the explain, as is the
>> > tradition.
>> >
>>
>> Right. BTW, did you get a chance to run the original test (for which
>> you have reported the problem) with this patch?
>
>
> Yes, this patch makes it use a parallel scan, with great improvement.
>
Thanks for the confirmation. Find rebased patch attached.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
parallel_paths_include_tlist_cost_v5.patch | application/octet-stream | 11.3 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2017-11-05 05:02:50 | Re: Parallel Plans and Cost of non-filter functions |
Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2017-11-05 03:07:51 | Re: possible encoding issues with libxml2 functions |