Re: Delete, foreign key, index usage

From: Rick Otten <rottenwindfish(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Johann Spies <johann(dot)spies(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-performa(dot)" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Delete, foreign key, index usage
Date: 2017-04-05 11:15:45
Message-ID: CAMAYy4KMt-NxqmhNmLr5gxH_WOJqnmP17BGXCj1G37YMk2jR2Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 6:40 AM, Johann Spies <johann(dot)spies(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On 4 April 2017 at 14:07, Johann Spies <johann(dot)spies(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > Why would that be?
>
> To answer my own question. After experimenting a lot we found that
> 9.6 uses a parallel seqscan that is actually a lot faster than using
> the index on these large tables.
>
> This, to us was a surprise!
>
>
If you have modern GPU's available, you could try the pg-strom extension -
https://github.com/pg-strom/devel
It leverages GPU's to further parallelize scans.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dinesh Chandra 12108 2017-04-05 16:53:05 How to send content of log file in official mailid.
Previous Message Johann Spies 2017-04-05 10:40:21 Re: Delete, foreign key, index usage