Re: Proposal : Parallel Merge Join

From: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal : Parallel Merge Join
Date: 2017-03-07 16:38:51
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 7:47 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> You're right to be confused, because that seems to be a bug in the
> existing code. There seems to be no guarantee that the cheapest
> parallel-safe path will be in the cheapest_parameterized_paths list.
> I'll go fix that.

Okay, Done the simmilar changes in sort_inner_and_outer as well.
> As a matter of style, when testing a value of type "bool", write if
> (x) or if (!x). When testing a variable of some other type, say int,
> write if (x == 0) or if (x != 0) or whatever.


Apart from this, there was one problem in match_unsorted_outer (in
v10), Basically, if inner_cheapest_total was not parallel_safe then I
was always getting parallel safe inner. But, we should not do anything
if jointype was JOIN_UNIQUE_INNER, so fixed that also.

Dilip Kumar

Attachment Content-Type Size
parallel_mergejoin_v11.patch application/octet-stream 13.9 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-03-07 16:39:22 Re: Logical replication existing data copy
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-03-07 16:37:41 Re: Parallel bitmap heap scan