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()

* Adapted docs to mention the newly committed max_parallel_workers GUC
in the context of discussing proposed max_parallel_workers_maintenance

* Fixed trivial assertion failure bug that could be tripped when a
conventional sort uses very little memory.

Peter Geoghegan

Attachment: 0002-Add-temporary-testing-tools.patch.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data

Attachment: 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:

Reply via email to