From: | Rafia Sabih <rafia(dot)sabih(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Increasing parallel workers at runtime |
Date: | 2017-05-23 12:06:33 |
Message-ID: | CAOGQiiNFOH7h61BsD2zkck=TgrYaX6J8cVmS=0MQ_iO8xV9fmw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Isn't this point contradictory? Basically, on one side you are
> suggesting to calculate additional workers (work_remaining) based on
> selectivity and on another side you are saying that it will fix
> estimation errors. IIUC, then you are talking about some sort of
> executor feedback to adjust a number of workers which might be a good
> thing to do but I that is a different problem to solve. As of now, I
> don't think we have that type of mechanism even for non-parallel
> execution.
>
Yes, I am talking of a executor feedback mechanism sort of a thing.
For non parallel execution it's a lot more challenging since the
execution plan might need to be changed in the runtime, but in
parallel query case only addition/subtraction of workers is to be
dealt, which appears to be a less complex thing.
Why I am thinking in this direction is because in my experience it
seems very easy to regress with more workers when over-estimation is
done and this runtime calculation of workers can mitigate it largely.
However, I understand that this might require more proof than my
experience alone. Let's see if anybody else shares my gut feeling. :)
--
Regards,
Rafia Sabih
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2017-05-23 12:14:39 | retry shm attach for windows (WAS: Re: OK, so culicidae is *still* broken) |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-05-23 12:00:05 | Re: Regarding Postgres Dynamic Shared Memory (DSA) |