Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Append implementation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Khandekar
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Append implementation
Date
Msg-id CAJ3gD9ctD=heQAzj4nJSuv7aKhiCt4+q_p+7pM3jQW+bvwksxw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Append implementation  (Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan.pg@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Append implementation
List pgsql-hackers
> On 14 February 2017 at 22:35, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> For example, suppose that I have a scan of two children, one
>> of which has parallel_workers of 4, and the other of which has
>> parallel_workers of 3.  If I pick parallel_workers of 7 for the
>> Parallel Append, that's probably too high.

In the patch, in such case, 7 workers are indeed selected for Parallel
Append path, so that both the subplans are able to execute in parallel
with their full worker capacity. Are you suggesting that we should not
?



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query
Next
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM authentication, take three