On 01/15/2013 11:32 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 01:28:18PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>> Claudio, Stephen,
>> It really seems like the areas where we could get the most "bang for the
>> buck" in parallelism would be:
>> 1. Parallel sort
>> 2. Parallel aggregation (for commutative aggregates)
>> 3. Parallel nested loop join (especially for expression joins, like GIS)
>> parallel data load? :/
> We have that in pg_restore, and I thinnk we are getting parallel dump in
> 9.3, right? Unfortunately, I don't see it in the last 9.3 commit-fest.
> Is it still being worked on?
I am about half way through reviewing it. Unfortunately paid work take
precedence over unpaid work.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Abhijit Menon-Sen||Date: 2013-01-16 14:10:54|
|Subject: Re: CF3+4|
|Previous:||From: Gurjeet Singh||Date: 2013-01-16 14:04:27|
|Subject: Re: pg_dump transaction's read-only mode|