| From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, 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: | 2015-01-22 05:26:50 |
| Message-ID: | 54C08A1A.20109@lab.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 22-01-2015 PM 02:30, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> Perhaps you are aware or you've postponed working on it, but I see that
>> a plan executing in a worker does not know about instrumentation.
>
> I have deferred it until other main parts are stabilised/reviewed. Once
> that is done, we can take a call what is best we can do for instrumentation.
> Thom has reported the same as well upthread.
>
Ah, I missed Thom's report.
>> Note the "Rows Removed by Filter". I guess the difference may be
>> because, all the rows filtered by workers were not accounted for. I'm
>> not quite sure, but since exec_worker_stmt goes the Portal way,
>> QueryDesc.instrument_options remains unset and hence no instrumentation
>> opportunities in a worker backend. One option may be to pass
>> instrument_options down to worker_stmt?
>>
>
> I think there is more to it, master backend need to process that information
> as well.
>
I see.
Thanks,
Amit
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2015-01-22 05:30:02 | Re: Parallel Seq Scan |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2015-01-22 05:14:37 | Re: Parallel Seq Scan |