Re: explain analyze output with parallel workers - question about meaning of information for explain.depesz.com

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Hubert Lubaczewski <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers mailing list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: explain analyze output with parallel workers - question about meaning of information for explain.depesz.com
Date: 2017-12-04 17:47:40
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYtMoOjygyGB-8f5qAacpup=iaHo8bXGmZ8NQQcVKnvNA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Attached patch contains regression test as well. Note that I have
> carefully disabled all variable stats by using (analyze, timing off,
> summary off, costs off) and then selected parallel sequential scan on
> the right of join so that we have nloops and rows as variable stats
> and those should remain constant.

The regression test contains a whitespace error about which git diff
--check complains.

Also, looking at this again, shouldn't the reinitialization of the
instrumentation arrays happen in ExecParallelReinitialize rather than
ExecParallelFinish, so that we don't spend time doing it unless the
Gather is actually re-executed?

--
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 2017-12-04 17:49:08 Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw super user checks
Previous Message Pantelis Theodosiou 2017-12-04 17:44:31 Re: [HACKERS] Secondary index access optimizations