On 01/16/2013 12:20 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 09:05:39AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> 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.
> Do you think it will make it into 9.3?
Yes, I hope it will.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2013-01-16 17:36:10|
|Subject: Re: CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution)|
|Previous:||From: Thom Brown||Date: 2013-01-16 17:25:29|
|Subject: Re: Materialized views WIP patch|