| From: | "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> | 
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: Support Parallel Query Execution in Executor | 
| Date: | 2006-04-07 02:18:24 | 
| Message-ID: | e14ibn$1u09$1@news.hub.org | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches | 
""Jonah H. Harris"" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote
>
> Great work!  I had looked into this a little bit and came to the same
> ideas/problems you did, but none of them seemed insurmountable at all.
>  I'd be interested in working with you on this if you'd like.
>
Yes, I am happy to work with anyone on the topic. The plan in mind is like
this:
(1) stable the master-slave seqscan: solve all the problems left;
(2) parallize the seqscan: AFAICS, this should not very difficult based on
1, may only need some scan portition assignment;
(3) add an indexscan or other one or two node type to  master-slave
solution: this is in order to make the framework extensible;
(4) parallize these node - this will be a big chunk of job;
(5) add a two-phase optimization to the server - we have to consider the
partitioned table in this stage, yet another big chunk of job;
Regards,
Qingqing
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-04-07 03:39:29 | Re: commit callback, request, SOLVED | 
| Previous Message | Thomas Hallgren | 2006-04-06 16:56:24 | Re: Support Parallel Query Execution in Executor | 
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2006-04-07 09:13:47 | Re: Bug in window xp | 
| Previous Message | Peter Brant | 2006-04-06 21:54:38 | Re: pgstat: remove delayed destroy / pipe: |