Re: Parallel Seq Scan vs kernel read ahead
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
From: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
To: Ranier Vilela <ranier.vf@gmail.com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2020-05-21T02:31:37Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 1:38 PM Ranier Vilela <ranier.vf@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 11:15 AM Ranier Vilela <ranier.vf@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > postgres=# set max_parallel_workers_per_gather = 0; >> >> > Time: 227238,445 ms (03:47,238) >> >> > postgres=# set max_parallel_workers_per_gather = 1; >> >> > Time: 138027,351 ms (02:18,027) > Vanila Postgres (latest) > > create table t as select generate_series(1, 800000000)::int i; > set max_parallel_workers_per_gather = 0; > Time: 210524,317 ms (03:30,524) > set max_parallel_workers_per_gather = 1; > Time: 146982,737 ms (02:26,983) Thanks. So it seems like Linux, Windows and anything using ZFS are OK, which probably explains why we hadn't heard complaints about it.
Commits
-
Allocate consecutive blocks during parallel seqscans
- 56788d2156fc 14.0 landed