Re: Parallel Append implementation

From: Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rafia Sabih <rafia(dot)sabih(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Parallel Append implementation
Date: 2017-09-28 10:18:11
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 20 September 2017 at 11:32, Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> There is still the open point being
> discussed : whether to have non-parallel-aware partial Append path, or
> always have parallel-aware Append paths.

Attached is the revised patch v16. In previous versions, we used to
add a non-parallel-aware Partial Append path having all partial
subpaths if the Parallel Append path already added does not contain
all-partial subpaths. Now in the patch, when we add such Append Path
containing all partial subpaths, we make it parallel-aware (unless
enable_parallelappend is false). So in this case, there will be a
parallel-aware Append path containing one or more non-partial
subpaths, and there will be another parallel-aware Append path
containing all-partial subpaths.

-Amit Khandekar
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company

Attachment Content-Type Size
ParallelAppend_v16.patch application/octet-stream 58.7 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Korotkov 2017-09-28 10:19:38 Re: GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6)
Previous Message amul sul 2017-09-28 09:56:48 Re: [POC] hash partitioning