Re: Hmmm... why does CPU-intensive pl/pgsql code parallelise so badly when queries parallelise fine? Anyone else seen this?

From: Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Hmmm... why does CPU-intensive pl/pgsql code parallelise so badly when queries parallelise fine? Anyone else seen this?
Date: 2015-07-09 13:22:10
Message-ID: mnlsi2$oh8$1@ger.gmane.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Graeme B. Bell schrieb am 09.07.2015 um 11:44:
> I don't recall seeing a clear statement telling me I should mark pl/pgsql
> functions nonvolatile wherever possible or throw all performance and
> scalability out the window.

From: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/xfunc-volatility.html

"For best optimization results, you should label your functions
with the strictest volatility category that is valid for them."

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Graeme B. Bell 2015-07-09 15:04:06 Re: Hmmm... why does CPU-intensive pl/pgsql code parallelise so badly when queries parallelise fine? Anyone else seen this?
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2015-07-09 13:03:32 Re: Hmmm... why does CPU-intensive pl/pgsql code parallelise so badly when queries parallelise fine? Anyone else seen this?