Re: [HACKERS] Parallel bitmap heap scan - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dilip Kumar
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Parallel bitmap heap scan
Date
Msg-id CAFiTN-sPtFUqahAKymqFp-zBLTP8d-W+=pjr64RFLy2nor58HA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Parallel bitmap heap scan  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Parallel bitmap heap scan  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 9:44 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> I mean, IIUC, the call to PrefetchBuffer() is not done under any lock.
> And that's the slow part.  The tiny amount of time we spend updating
> the prefetch information under the mutex should be insignificant
> compared to the cost of actually reading the buffer.  Unless I'm
> missing something.

Okay, but IIUC, the PrefetchBuffer is an async call to load the buffer
if it's not already in shared buffer? so If instead of one process is
making multiple async calls to PrefetchBuffer, if we make it by
multiple processes will it be any faster?  Or you are thinking that at
least we can make BufTableLookup call parallel because that is not an
async call.


-- 
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning
Next
From: Keith Fiske
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning