Re: Parallel copy

From: vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Hou, Zhijie" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Parallel copy
Date: 2020-12-26 15:48:13
Message-ID: CALDaNm3vwmmt6Duao9ADB5Wed9G3JM41ECLsoPtCQXGRqkm=MQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 3:05 PM Hou, Zhijie <houzj(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> > Yes this optimization can be done, I will handle this in the next patch
> > set.
> >
>
> I have a suggestion for the parallel safety-check.
>
> As designed, The leader does not participate in the insertion of data.
> If User use (PARALLEL 1), there is only one worker process which will do the insertion.
>
> IMO, we can skip some of the safety-check in this case, becase the safety-check is to limit parallel insert.
> (except temporary table or ...)
>
> So, how about checking (PARALLEL 1) separately ?
> Although it looks a bit complicated, But (PARALLEL 1) do have a good performance improvement.
>

Thanks for the comments Hou Zhijie, I will run a few tests with 1
worker and try to include this in the next patch set.

Regards,
Vignesh
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message vignesh C 2020-12-26 15:50:45 Re: Parallel Inserts in CREATE TABLE AS
Previous Message vignesh C 2020-12-26 15:45:52 Re: Added missing copy related data structures to typedefs.list