Re: Asynchronous Append on postgres_fdw nodes.

From: Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Andrey Lepikhov <a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Asynchronous Append on postgres_fdw nodes.
Date: 2021-05-07 15:55:07
Message-ID: CAPmGK16PzmShES=4jH+usW+8SK3qduevob9TVw_m=ibWFOGcZg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 2:12 AM Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> I'd suggest the language point out that it's not actually possible to do
> otherwise, since they all need to be part of the same transaction.
>
> Without that, it looks like we're just missing a trick somewhere and
> someone might think that they could improve PG to open multiple
> connections to the same remote server to execute them in parallel.

Agreed.

> Maybe:
>
> In order to ensure that the data being returned from a foreign server
> is consistent, postgres_fdw will only open one connection for a given
> foreign server and will run all queries against that server sequentially
> even if there are multiple foreign tables involved. In such a case, it
> may be more performant to disable this option to eliminate the overhead
> associated with running queries asynchronously.

Ok, I’ll merge this into the next version.

Thanks!

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Etsuro Fujita 2021-05-07 16:05:47 Re: Asynchronous Append on postgres_fdw nodes.
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2021-05-07 15:27:01 Re: Anti-critical-section assertion failure in mcxt.c reached by walsender