Re: Parallel copy - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Parallel copy
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZXwaggwYwm-8hhY44JrrAwxqTd4w9qtbRNUoeW4WO+bA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Parallel copy  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: Parallel copy  (Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 4:16 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> I don't think so. If only one process does the splitting, the
> exclusively locked section is just popping off a bunch of offsets of the
> ring. And that could fairly easily be done with atomic ops (since what
> we need is basically a single producer multiple consumer queue, which
> can be done lock free fairly easily ). Whereas in the case of each
> process doing the splitting, the exclusively locked part is splitting
> along lines - which takes considerably longer than just popping off a
> few offsets.

Hmm, that does seem believable.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?