Re: Parallel sec scan in plpgsql

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alex Ignatov <a(dot)ignatov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Parallel sec scan in plpgsql
Date: 2016-09-20 13:24:03
Message-ID: CAA4eK1J=U4=8AGJ-2ujOSkpM28i17N7g33CqQRWScT-ijds8FQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 11:54 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> In general, I think we should support the cases as required (or
>> written) by you from plpgsql or sql functions. We need more work to
>> support such cases. There are probably two ways of supporting such
>> cases, we can build some intelligence in plpgsql execution such that
>> it can recognise such queries and allow to use parallelism or we need
>> to think of enabling parallelism for cases where we don't run the plan
>> to completion. Most of the use cases from plpgsql or sql function
>> fall into later category as they don't generally run the plan to
>> completion.
>
> I think there's certainly more work that could be done to teach
> PL/pgsql about cases where the query will run to completion. I didn't
> work very hard to make sure we covered all of those; there are
> probably several different cases where parallelism could be safely
> enabled but currently isn't. Also, I didn't do anything at all to
> update the other PLs, and that would be good, too.
>
> However, I think the chances of supporting parallel query for queries
> not executed to completion any time in the near future are very poor.
>

I think here point is that for any case where there is count of rows
to be selected, we disable parallelism. There are many genuine cases
like select count(*) into cnt ... which will run to completion, but as
plpgsql passes row count to be 1 or 2, it doesn't enter parallel mode.
There are couple other cases like that. Do you see a reason for not
enabling parallelism for such cases?

--
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 2016-09-20 13:41:06 Re: Declarative partitioning - another take
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2016-09-20 13:02:21 Re: Hash Indexes