Re: Parallel Aggregate

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Paul Ramsey <pramsey(at)cleverelephant(dot)ca>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Parallel Aggregate
Date: 2016-03-19 14:19:07
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYZhzEWCx1eSpPLhwDydOumyHvSfACjtoCJ52HoNoe5yQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 10:32 PM, David Rowley
<david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Updated patch is attached.

I think this looks structurally correct now, and I think it's doing
the right thing as far as parallelism is concerned. I don't see any
obvious problems in the rest of it, either, but I haven't thought
hugely deeply about the way you are doing the costing, nor have I
totally convinced myself that all of the PathTarget and setrefs stuff
is correct. But I think it's probably pretty close. I'll study it
some more next week.

--
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 Robert Haas 2016-03-19 14:42:51 Re: [GENERAL] Request - repeat value of \pset title during \watch interations
Previous Message Robert Haas 2016-03-19 13:38:38 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve memory management for external sorts.