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

Re: Parallel query execution

From: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Parallel query execution
Date: 2013-01-17 03:32:28
Message-ID: CAMkU=1zU9myesU-z-F+a1MZC22USAirK=gyJuFJ3_HDN+h9BhQ@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wednesday, January 16, 2013, Stephen Frost wrote:

> * Bruce Momjian (bruce(at)momjian(dot)us <javascript:;>) wrote:
> > I am not sure how a COPY could be easily parallelized, but I supposed it
> > could be done as part of the 1GB segment feature.  People have
> > complained that COPY is CPU-bound, so it might be very interesting to
> > see if we could offload some of that parsing overhead to a child.
>
> COPY can certainly be CPU bound but before we can parallelize that
> usefully we need to solve the problem around extent locking when trying
> to do multiple COPY's to the same table.
>

I think that is rather over-stating it.  Even with unindexed untriggered
tables, I can get some benefit from doing hand-rolled parallel COPY before
the extension lock becomes an issue, at least on some machines.  And with
triggered or indexed tables, all the more so.

Cheers,

Jeff

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2013-01-17 03:40:07
Subject: Re: CF3+4
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2013-01-17 03:29:24
Subject: Re: Parallel query execution

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