| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: select_parallel test fails with nonstandard block size |
| Date: | 2016-09-15 14:19:27 |
| Message-ID: | 20160915141927.GA501349@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > Possibly we ought to change things so that the default value of
> > min_parallel_relation_size is a fixed number of bytes rather
> > than a fixed number of blocks. Not sure though.
>
> The reason why this was originally reckoned in blocks is because the
> data is divided between the workers on the basis of a block number.
Maybe the solution is to fill the table to a given number of blocks
rather than a number of rows.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2016-09-15 14:23:09 | Re: Hash Indexes |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-09-15 14:13:29 | Re: Hash Indexes |