On 01/17/2012 07:09 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
On Jan 13, 2012, at 4:15 PM, Christopher Browne wrote:
Have two logical tasks:
a) A process that manages the list, and
b) Child processes doing vacuums.
Each time a child completes a table, it asks the parent for another one.
There is also a middle ground, because having the the scheduling process sounds
like a lot more work than what Josh was proposing.
CREATE TEMP SEQUENCE s;
SELECT relname, s mod<number of backends> AS backend_number
FROM ( SELECT relname
FROM pg_class
ORDER BY relpages
);
Of course, having an actual scheduling process is most likely the most
efficient.
We already have a model for this in parallel pg_restore. It would
probably not be terribly hard to adapt to parallel vacuum.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
