Re: Parallel Seq Scan
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Parallel Seq Scan |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 30549.1422459647@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Parallel Seq Scan (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Parallel Seq Scan
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > The problem here, as I see it, is that we're flying blind. If there's > just one spindle, I think it's got to be right to read the relation > sequentially. But if there are multiple spindles, it might not be, > but it seems hard to predict what we should do. We don't know what > the RAID chunk size is or how many spindles there are, so any guess as > to how to chunk up the relation and divide up the work between workers > is just a shot in the dark. I thought the proposal to chunk on the basis of "each worker processes one 1GB-sized segment" should work all right. The kernel should see that as sequential reads of different files, issued by different processes; and if it can't figure out how to process that efficiently then it's a very sad excuse for a kernel. You are right that trying to do any detailed I/O scheduling by ourselves is a doomed exercise. For better or worse, we have kept ourselves at sufficient remove from the hardware that we can't possibly do that successfully. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: