On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Peter Geoghegan <p...@heroku.com> wrote:
> I don't think that eager merging will prove all that effective,
> however it's implemented. I see a very I/O bound system when parallel
> CREATE INDEX merges serially. There is no obvious reason why you'd
> have a straggler worker process with CREATE INDEX, really.

In an effort to head off any misunderstanding around this patch
series, I started a new Wiki page for it:


This talks about parallel CREATE INDEX in particular, and uses of
parallel external sort more generally, including future uses beyond

This approach worked very well for me during the UPSERT project, where
a detailed overview really helped. With UPSERT, it was particularly
difficult to keep the *current* state of things straight, such as
current open items for the patch, areas of disagreement, and areas
where there was no longer any disagreement or controversy. I don't
think that this patch is even remotely as complicated as UPSERT was,
but it's still something that has had several concurrently active
mailing list threads (threads that are at least loosely related to the
project), so I think that this will be useful.

I welcome anyone with an interest in this project to review the Wiki
page, add their own concerns to it with -hackers citation, and add
their own content around related work. There is a kind of unresolved
question around where the Gather Merge work might fit in to what I've
come up with aleady. There may be other unresolved questions like
that, that I'm not even aware of.

I commit to maintaining the new Wiki page as a useful starting
reference for understanding the current state of this patch. I hope
this makes looking into the patch series less intimidating for
potential reviewers.

Peter Geoghegan

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to