Re: Async execution of postgres_fdw.

From: Matt Kelly <mkellycs(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Async execution of postgres_fdw.
Date: 2015-01-20 04:51:13
Message-ID: CA+KcUkhLUo+Vaj4xR8GVsof_nW79uDZTDYhOSdt13CFJkaEEdQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I think its telling that varying the fetch size doubled the performance,
even on localhost. If you were to repeat this test across a network, the
performance difference would be far more drastic.

I understand the desire to keep the fetch size small by default, but I
think your results demonstrate how important the value is. At the very
least, it is worth reconsidering this "arbitrary" value. However, I think
the real solution is to make this configurable. It probably should be a
new option on the foreign server or table, but an argument could be made
for it to be global across the server just like work_mem.

Obviously, this shouldn't block your current patch but its worth revisiting.

- Matt Kelly

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Abhijit Menon-Sen 2015-01-20 06:05:29 Re: pgaudit - an auditing extension for PostgreSQL
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2015-01-20 04:10:59 Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)