Re: Proposal : Parallel Merge Join

From: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal : Parallel Merge Join
Date: 2017-03-01 05:54:00
Message-ID: CAFiTN-uS2k-_ebuU9WDrLVFKf-FKqUF5QdVRqQtjnjf5nmC4QQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I think for now we can keep the parallel safety check for cheapest
> inner path, though it will be of use only for the very first time we
> compare the paths in that loop. I am not sure if there is any other
> better way to handle the same.

Done that way.

--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment Content-Type Size
parallel_mergejoin_v8.patch application/octet-stream 15.3 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2017-03-01 06:30:16 Re: [GENERAL] C++ port of Postgres
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2017-03-01 05:43:25 Re: Proposal : Parallel Merge Join