On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Peter Geoghegan <p...@heroku.com> wrote: > What do we need to teach pg_restore about parallel CREATE INDEX, if > anything at all? Could this be as simple as a blanket disabling of > parallelism for CREATE INDEX from pg_restore? Or, does it need to be > more sophisticated than that? I suppose that tools like reindexdb and > pgbench must be considered in a similar way.
I still haven't resolved this question, which seems like the most important outstanding question, but I attach V6. Changes: * tuplesort.c was adapted to use the recently committed condition variables stuff. This made things cleaner. No more ad-hoc WaitLatch() looping. * Adapted docs to mention the newly committed max_parallel_workers GUC in the context of discussing proposed max_parallel_workers_maintenance GUC. * Fixed trivial assertion failure bug that could be tripped when a conventional sort uses very little memory. -- Peter Geoghegan
0002-Add-temporary-testing-tools.patch.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data
0001-Add-parallel-B-tree-index-build-sorting.patch.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
