On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 8:02 AM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 2. Vacuum table and index (after 10000 transaction executed) > 1 worker : 12 sec > 2 workers : 49 sec > 3 workers : 54 sec > 4 workers : 53 sec > > As a result of my test, since multiple process could frequently try to > acquire the cleanup lock on same index buffer, execution time of > parallel vacuum got worse. > And it seems to be effective for only table vacuum so far, but is not > improved as expected (maybe disk bottleneck).
Not only that, but from your description (I haven't read the patch, sorry), you'd be scanning the whole index multiple times (one per worker). -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
