Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Parallel query execution

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Parallel query execution
Date: 2013-01-16 14:05:39
Message-ID: 50F6B3B3.8080505@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
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.

cheers

andrew


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Abhijit Menon-SenDate: 2013-01-16 14:10:54
Subject: Re: CF3+4
Previous:From: Gurjeet SinghDate: 2013-01-16 14:04:27
Subject: Re: pg_dump transaction's read-only mode

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group