Re: Parallel Seq Scan vs kernel read ahead

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Parallel Seq Scan vs kernel read ahead
Date: 2020-06-18 15:26:20
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYG-u4WTB1XV6cSei-s2Jdde13d2yUtbenLH66eMAPYcw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 6:15 AM David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> With a 32TB relation, the code will make the chunk size 16GB. Perhaps
> I should change the code to cap that at 1GB.

It seems pretty hard to believe there's any significant advantage to a
chunk size >1GB, so I would be in favor of that change.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais 2020-06-18 15:27:32 Re: [patch] demote
Previous Message Robert Haas 2020-06-18 15:23:41 Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY