| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alex Ignatov <a(dot)ignatov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Parallel sec scan in plpgsql |
| Date: | 2016-09-16 13:50:07 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1LzNPdYxQsG6bBXjZ=8rX2c8XyUKQy+OA+QaZ9_AV0+Sw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Alex Ignatov <a(dot)ignatov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> No it doesn't.
> Paralleling neither sql function nor plpgsql:
> Here is example :
>
> ipdr=> show max_worker_processes ;
> max_worker_processes
> ----------------------
> 128
> (1 row)
> ipdr=> set max_parallel_workers_per_gather to 128;
> SET
> ipdr=> set force_parallel_mode=on;
> SET
> ipdr=> set min_parallel_relation_size =0;
> SET
> ipdr=> set parallel_tuple_cost=0;
> SET
>
Can you try by setting force_parallel_mode = off;? I think it is
sending the whole function execution to worker due to
force_parallel_mode.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeevan Chalke | 2016-09-16 13:51:32 | Re: Aggregate Push Down - Performing aggregation on foreign server |
| Previous Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2016-09-16 13:47:14 | Re: Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem |