Re: Append with naive multiplexing of FDWs

From: "movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca" <movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca>
To: "Kyotaro Horiguchi" <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: bruce <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, ahsan(dot)hadi <ahsan(dot)hadi(at)highgo(dot)ca>, robertmhaas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, thomas(dot)munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, sfrost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Append with naive multiplexing of FDWs
Date: 2020-01-29 09:58:57
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers


>It is "asynchronous append on async-capable'd postgres-fdw scans". It
>could be called as such in the sense that it is intended to be used
>with sharding.
Yes that's it.

>Did you looked at my benchmarking result upthread? Even it gives
>significant gain even when gathering large number of tuples from
>multiple servers or even from a single server. It is because of its
>asynchronous nature.
I mean it gain performance at first, but it mets bottleneck while
increase the number of the nodes.
For example:
It has 2 nodes, it will gain 200% performance.
It has 3 nodes, it will gain 300% performance.
It has 4 nodes, it gain 300% performance.
It has 5 nodes, it gain 300% performance.

Highgo Software (Canada/China/Pakistan)
EMAIL: mailto:movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christoph Moench-Tegeder 2020-01-29 10:51:42 Re: psqlODBC development
Previous Message Daniel Verite 2020-01-29 09:51:27 Re: Making psql error out on output failures