Re: a funnel by any other name
| От | Simon Riggs |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: a funnel by any other name |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CANP8+jJhh92Z3gQL5Y47gNTfujL2GR+_m2P9eFWruMJc50+Uwg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: a funnel by any other name (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 22 September 2015 at 21:14, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
--
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > For 1, Gather makes most sense.
>
> Yeah, I'm leaning that way myself. Amit argued for "Parallel Gather"
> but I think that's overkill. There can't be a non-parallel gather,
> and long names are a pain.
"Gather" seems a pretty decent choice to me too, even if we only have a
single worker (your "1"). I don't think there's much need to
distinguish 1 from 2, is there?
I think so. 1 is Many->1 and the other is 1->Many.
You may wish to do an operation like a parallel merge join.
Parallel Sort -> Scatter -> Parallel Merge
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: