From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Hubert Lubaczewski <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers mailing list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: explain analyze output with parallel workers - question about meaning of information for explain.depesz.com |
Date: | 2017-12-05 07:59:36 |
Message-ID: | CAEepm=3QM1+22xgpcPeLJZo24SQC4c=m2X4Gmmh4CJr8RZ7oCA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 8:49 PM, Thomas Munro
<thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I have one another observation in the somewhat related area. From the
>> code, it looks like we might have some problem with displaying sort
>> info for workers for rescans. I think the problem with the sortinfo
>> is that it initializes shared info with local memory in
>> ExecSortRetrieveInstrumentation after which it won't be able to access
>> the values in shared memory changed by workers in rescans. We might
>> be able to fix it by having some local_info same as sahred_info in
>> sort node. But the main problem is how do we accumulate stats for
>> workers across rescans. The type of sort method can change across
>> rescans. We might be able to accumulate the size of Memory though,
>> but not sure if that is right. I think though this appears to be
>> somewhat related to the problem being discussed in this thread, it can
>> be dealt separately if we want to fix it.
>
> Yeah, that's broken. ExecSortRetrieveInstrumentation() is run for
> each loop, and after the first loop we've lost track of the pointer
> into shared memory because we replaced it with palloc'd copy. We
> could do what you said, or we could reinstate the pointer into the DSM
> in ExecSortReInitializeDSM() by looking it up in the TOC.
Or would it be an option to change the time
ExecXXXRetrieveInstrumentation() is called so it is run only once?
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nikhil Sontakke | 2017-12-05 08:00:01 | Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions |
Previous Message | Rajkumar Raghuwanshi | 2017-12-05 07:54:31 | Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables |