Re: Proposal: speeding up GIN build with parallel workers

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, "Constantin S(dot) Pan" <kvapen(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal: speeding up GIN build with parallel workers
Date: 2016-10-03 03:36:09
Message-ID: CAB7nPqQmTBg5m0vYk06UPA9waNog4cTy4X=yTC5uA7A=TSa0GA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> If we flushed the tree to a tape instead, then we could perhaps use the
> machinery that Peter's parallel B-tree patch is adding to tuplesort.c, to
> merge the tapes. I'm not sure if that works out, but I think it's worth some
> experimentation.

Marking as returned with feedback per mainly this comment.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2016-10-03 03:38:19 Re: Cache Hash Index meta page.
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2016-10-03 03:35:55 Re: Tracking wait event for latches