| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Fabrízio Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Parallel Seq Scan |
| Date: | 2015-07-01 07:51:08 |
| Message-ID: | 1435737068.4369.72.camel@jeff-desktop |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2015-07-01 at 11:07 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> For what you are asking to change name for?
There are still some places, at least in the comments, that call it a
parallel sequential scan.
> a. Infrastructure for parallel execution, like some of the stuff in
> execparallel.c, heapam.c,tqueue.c, etc and all other generic
> (non-nodes specific) code.
Did you consider passing tuples through the tqueue by reference rather
than copying? The page should be pinned by the worker process, but
perhaps that's a bad assumption to make?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2015-07-01 08:00:16 | Re: Reducing ClogControlLock contention |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-07-01 07:30:01 | Re: pg_rewind failure by file deletion in source server |