Re: Parallel Sort - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim Nasby
Subject Re: Parallel Sort
Date
Msg-id 519FADC1.4050908@nasby.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Parallel Sort  (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>)
Responses Re: Parallel Sort
Re: Parallel Sort
List pgsql-hackers
On 5/13/13 9:28 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> It would be great if one client session could take advantage of multiple CPU
> cores.  EnterpriseDB wishes to start the trek into this problem space for 9.4
> by implementing parallel internal (i.e. not spilling to disk) sort.  This
> touches on a notable subset of the infrastructure components we'll need for
> parallel general query.  My intent is to map out the key design topics, hear
> about critical topics I hadn't considered, and solicit feedback on the quality
> of the high-level plan.  Full designs for key pieces will come later.

Have you considered GPU-based sorting? I know there's been discussion in the past.

To me, the biggest advantage of GPU sorting is that most of the concerns you've laid out go away; a backend that needs
tosort just throws data at the GPU to do the actual sorting; all the MVCC issues and what not remain within the scope
ofa single backend.
 
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Data Architect                       jim@nasby.net
512.569.9461 (cell)                         http://jim.nasby.net



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: visibilitymap_set and checksums
Next
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL segments (names) not in a sequence