Re: Parallel copy

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rafia Sabih <rafia(dot)pghackers(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ants Aasma <ants(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alastair Turner <minion(at)decodable(dot)me>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Parallel copy
Date: 2020-10-09 05:12:38
Message-ID: CAA4eK1KRAfQHO9hU1zRvT9qb=hi4=P7YwrphNx7bYgTzxoO6ww@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 12:14 AM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 12:19 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I am convinced by the reason given by Kyotaro-San in that another
> > thread [1] and performance data shown by Peter that this can't be an
> > independent improvement and rather in some cases it can do harm. Now,
> > if you need it for a parallel-copy path then we can change it
> > specifically to the parallel-copy code path but I don't understand
> > your reason completely.
> >
>
> Whenever we need data to be populated, we will get a new data block &
> pass it to CopyGetData to populate the data. In case of file copy, the
> server will completely fill the data block. We expect the data to be
> filled completely. If data is available it will completely load the
> complete data block in case of file copy. There is no scenario where
> even if data is present a partial data block will be returned except
> for EOF or no data available. But in case of STDIN data copy, even
> though there is 8K data available in data block & 8K data available in
> STDIN, CopyGetData will return as soon as libpq buffer data is more
> than the minread. We will pass new data block every time to load data.
> Every time we pass an 8K data block but CopyGetData loads a few bytes
> in the new data block & returns. I wanted to keep the same data
> population logic for both file copy & STDIN copy i.e copy full 8K data
> blocks & then the populated data can be required. There is an
> alternative solution I can have some special handling in case of STDIN
> wherein the existing data block can be passed with the index from
> where the data should be copied. Thoughts?
>

What you are proposing as an alternative solution, isn't that what we
are doing without the patch? IIUC, you require this because of your
corresponding changes to handle COPY_NEW_FE in CopyReadLine(), is that
right? If so, what is the difficulty in making it behave similar to
the non-parallel case?

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dilip Kumar 2020-10-09 05:25:14 Re: Logical replication CPU-bound with TRUNCATE/DROP/CREATE many tables
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2020-10-09 05:00:06 Re: Logical replication CPU-bound with TRUNCATE/DROP/CREATE many tables