At Fri, 28 Jul 2017 17:31:05 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote in <20170728.173105.238045591.horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> > Thank you for the comment. > > At Wed, 26 Jul 2017 17:16:43 -0400, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote > in <CA+TgmoYrbgTBnLwnr1v=pk+C=znWg7AgV9=m9ehrq6tdexp...@mail.gmail.com> > > regression all the same. Every type of intermediate node will have to > > have a code path where it uses ExecAsyncRequest() / > > ExecAyncHogeResponse() rather than ExecProcNode() to get tuples, and > > I understand what Robert concerns and I share the same > opinion. It needs further different framework. > > At Thu, 27 Jul 2017 06:39:51 -0400, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote > in <CA+Tgmoa=ke_zfucOAa3YEUnBSC=FSXn8SU2aYc8PGBBp=yy...@mail.gmail.com> > > On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 5:43 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > > The scheme he has allows $extra_stuff to be injected into ExecProcNode at > > > no cost when $extra_stuff is not needed, because you simply don't insert > > > the wrapper function when it's not needed. I'm not sure that it will ... > > Yeah, I don't quite see how that would apply in this case -- what we > > need here is not as simple as just conditionally injecting an extra > > bit. > > Thank you for the pointer, Tom. The subject (segfault in HEAD...) > haven't made me think that this kind of discussion was held > there. Anyway it seems very closer to asynchronous execution so > I'll catch up it considering how I can associate with this.
I understand the executor change which has just been made at master based on the pointed thread. This seems to have the capability to let exec-node switch to async-aware with no extra cost on non-async processing. So it would be doable to (just) *shrink* the current framework by detaching the async-aware side of the API. But to get the most out of asynchrony, it is required that multiple async-capable nodes distributed under async-unaware nodes run simultaneously. There seems two ways to achieve this. One is propagating required-async-nodes bitmap up to the topmost node and waiting for the all required nodes to become ready. In the long run this requires all nodes to be async-aware and that apparently would have bad effect on performance to async-unaware nodes containing async-capable nodes. Another is getting rid of recursive call to run an execution tree. It is perhaps the same to what mentioned as "data-centric processing" in a previous threads , , but I'd like to I pay attention on the aspect of "enableing to resume execution tree from arbitrary leaf node". So I'm considering to realize it still in one-tuple-by-one manner instead of collecting all tuples of a leaf node first. Even though I'm not sure it is doable.  https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/bf2827dcce55594c8d7a8f7ffd3ab77159a9b...@szxeml521-mbs.china.huawei.com  https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160629183254.frcm3dgg54ud5...@alap3.anarazel.de regards, -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers