Re: Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation)

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation)
Date: 2017-03-21 21:49:28
Message-ID: CAEepm=0QoRJNjnrLfAyTpQ4OyY3uKqXdNhO7-mYOvsb+6Dbffg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
>> I disagree with that. It is a
>> trade-off, I suppose. I have now run out of time to work through it
>> with you or Thomas, though.
>
> Bummer.

I'm going to experiment with refactoring the v10 parallel CREATE INDEX
patch to use the SharedBufFileSet interface from
hj-shared-buf-file-v8.patch today and see what problems I run into.

--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2017-03-21 22:00:23 Re: pg_dump, pg_dumpall and data durability
Previous Message Petr Jelinek 2017-03-21 21:37:54 Re: logical replication apply to run with sync commit off by default