On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 4:04 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> Your point is genuine, but OTOH let us say if max_parallel_degree = 1 means
>> parallelism is disabled then when somebody sets
On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 4:04 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> Your point is genuine, but OTOH let us say if max_parallel_degree = 1 means
> parallelism is disabled then when somebody sets max_parallel_degree = 2,
> then it looks somewhat odd to me that, it will mean that 1 worker
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:14 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Robert Haas
wrote:
>
> Now, you might wonder why it is that the leader cannot also sort runs,
> just as a worker would. It's possible, but it isn't exactly
>
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:41 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Haribabu Kommi >
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Amit
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Haribabu Kommi
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Amit Kapila
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Haribabu
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Haribabu Kommi
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Haribabu Kommi <
> kommi.harib...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 7:19
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Haribabu Kommi
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 7:19 PM, Amit Kapila
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >
>> > Changed the code such that
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Haribabu Kommi
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 7:19 PM, Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >>
> >
> > Changed the code such that nworkers_launched gets used wherever
> > appropriate instead of nworkers. This includes
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 7:19 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Amit Kapila
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:14 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Robert Haas
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Amit Kapila
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:14 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Robert Haas
wrote:
> > >> I'm not sure why the test for nworkers following the
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 5:45 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> Well, in general, the parallel sort code doesn't really get to pick
> whether or not a BackgroundWorkerSlot gets used or not. Whoever
> created the parallel context decides how many workers to request, and
> then the
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> I don't really understand why this should be so. I thought the idea
>> of parallel sort is (roughly) that each worker should read data until
>> it fills work_mem, sort that data, and write a tape. Repeat until no
>>
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:14 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Robert Haas
wrote:
> >> I'm not sure why the test for nworkers following the
> >> LaunchParallelWorkers() call doesn't look like this, though:
> >>
> >> /* Set
>
> > More importantly, I have other, entirely general concerns. Other major
> > RDBMSs have settings that are very similar to max_parallel_degree,
> > with a setting of 1 effectively disabling all parallelism. Both Oracle
> > and SQL Server have settings that they both call the "maximum degree
>
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 12:29 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> The Gather node executor function ExecGather() does this:
> [ code ]
> I'm not sure why the test for nworkers following the
> LaunchParallelWorkers() call doesn't look like this, though:
>
> /* Set up tuple queue
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I'm not sure why the test for nworkers following the
>> LaunchParallelWorkers() call doesn't look like this, though:
>>
>> /* Set up tuple queue readers to read the results. */
>> if (pcxt->nworkers_launched >
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> With parallel sequential scan, a max_parallel_degree of 8 could result
> in 16 processes scanning in parallel.
I meant a max_worker_processes setting, which of course is different.
Nevertheless, I find it surprising that
The Gather node executor function ExecGather() does this:
/*
* Register backend workers. We might not get as many as we
* requested, or indeed any at all.
*/
pcxt = node->pei->pcxt;
LaunchParallelWorkers(pcxt);
/* Set up tuple queue readers to read the results. */
18 matches
Mail list logo