| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Parallel query execution |
| Date: | 2013-01-16 21:18:38 |
| Message-ID: | 20130116211838.GA27918@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:06:51PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2013/1/16 Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>:
> > * Bruce Momjian (bruce(at)momjian(dot)us) 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.
>
> Probably update any related indexes and constraint checking should be
> paralellized.
Wiki updated:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Parallel_Query_Execution
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dickson S. Guedes | 2013-01-16 21:57:01 | Re: Parallel query execution |
| Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2013-01-16 21:16:03 | Re: Event Triggers: adding information |