Re: why not parallel seq scan for slow functions

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: why not parallel seq scan for slow functions
Date: 2017-08-16 11:23:34
Message-ID: CAA4eK1+3uegH7Nf_9iMYfkRdzzJrE93_0SsA_bjsEySpnrj9xw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 7:15 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I think skipping a generation of gather paths for scan node or top
>> level join node generated via standard_join_search seems straight
>> forward, but skipping for paths generated via geqo seems to be tricky
>> (See use of generate_gather_paths in merge_clump). Assuming, we find
>> some way to skip it for top level scan/join node, I don't think that
>> will be sufficient, we have some special way to push target list below
>> Gather node in apply_projection_to_path, we need to move that part as
>> well in generate_gather_paths.
>
> I don't think that can work, because at that point we don't know what
> target list the upper node wants to impose.
>

I am suggesting to call generate_gather_paths just before we try to
apply projection on paths in grouping_planner (file:planner.c;
line:1787; commit:004a9702). Won't the target list for upper nodes be
available at that point?

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2017-08-16 11:27:42 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Include foreign tables in information_schema.table_privileges
Previous Message Augustine, Jobin 2017-08-16 11:09:16 Re: [HACKERS] Replication to Postgres 10 on Windows is broken