RE: Transaction commits VS Transaction commits (with parallel) VS query mean time

From: "Jamison, Kirk" <k(dot)jamison(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
To: 'Haribabu Kommi' <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: Transaction commits VS Transaction commits (with parallel) VS query mean time
Date: 2019-04-08 02:24:33
Message-ID: D09B13F772D2274BB348A310EE3027C648E5D2@g01jpexmbkw24
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Monday, April 8, 2019 9:04 AM (GMT+9), Haribabu Kommi wrote:

>On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 3:29 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com<mailto:amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>> wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 10:45 AM Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com<mailto:kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>> wrote:
>> Thanks for the review.
>> While changing the approach to use the is_parallel_worker_flag, I thought
>> that the rest of the stats are also not required to be updated and also those
>> are any way write operations and those values are zero anyway for parallel
>> workers.
>> Instead of expanding the patch scope, I just changed to avoid the commit
>> or rollback stats as discussed, and later we can target the handling of all the
>> internal transactions and their corresponding stats.

> The patch looks good to me. I have changed the commit message and ran
> the pgindent in the attached patch. Can you once see if that looks
> fine to you? Also, we should backpatch this till 9.6. So, can you
> once verify if the change is fine in all bank branches? Also, test
> with a force_parallel_mode option. I have already tested it with
> force_parallel_mode = 'regress' in HEAD, please test it in back
> branches as well.
> Thanks for the updated patch.
> I tested in back branches even with force_parallelmode and it is working
> as expected. But the patches apply is failing in back branches, so attached
> the patches for their branches. For v11 it applies with hunks.

There are 3 patches for this thread:
_v5: for PG v11 to current head
_10: for PG10 branch
_96: for PG9.6

I have also tried applying these latest patches, .
The patch set works correctly from patch application, build to compilation.
I also tested with force_parallel_mode, and it works as intended.

So I am marking this thread as “Ready for Committer”.
I hope this makes it on v12 before the feature freeze.

Kirk Jamison

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tsunakawa, Takayuki 2019-04-08 02:28:12 RE: Speed up transaction completion faster after many relations are accessed in a transaction
Previous Message Tsunakawa, Takayuki 2019-04-08 01:16:31 RE: reloption to prevent VACUUM from truncating empty pages at the end of relation