Re: Parallel Seq Scan - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject Re: Parallel Seq Scan
Date
Msg-id 54C298F5.6040107@commandprompt.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Parallel Seq Scan  (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>)
Responses Re: Parallel Seq Scan
List pgsql-hackers
On 01/23/2015 10:44 AM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> number of workers especially at slightly higher worker count.
>
> Those fixed chunk numbers look pretty screwy. 2, 4 and 8 workers make no
> difference, then suddenly 16 cuts times by 1/2 to 1/3? Then 32 cuts time
> by another 1/2 to 1/3?

cached? First couple of runs gets the relations into memory?

JD



-- 
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/  503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
High Availability, Oracle Conversion, @cmdpromptinc
"If we send our children to Caesar for their education, we should             not be surprised when they come back as
Romans."



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade and rsync
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade and rsync