Re: Parallell Optimizer
| От | Michael Paquier |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Parallell Optimizer |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAB7nPqR4mtZH+Xxbq5WsMLtNXKWg_rJg8iSgWQc97+93fiEMmA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Parallell Optimizer (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Parallell Optimizer
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
-- On 7 June 2013 20:23, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:Separate processes are more common because it covers the general case
> As for other databases, I suspect that ones that have parallel execution
> are probably doing it with a thread model not a process model.
where query execution is spread across multiple nodes. Threads don't
work across nodes and parallel queries predate (working) threading
models.
Indeed. Parallelism based on processes would be more convenient for master-master
type of applications. Even if no master-master feature is implemented directly in core,
at least a parallelism infrastructure based on processes could be used for this purpose.
type of applications. Even if no master-master feature is implemented directly in core,
at least a parallelism infrastructure based on processes could be used for this purpose.
Michael
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: