Re: Documentation refinement for Parallel Scans
David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
From: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
To: Zhang Mingli <zmlpostgres@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-10-20T06:33:34Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- fix_parallel_seqscan_docs.patch (text/plain) patch
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 at 16:03, Zhang Mingli <zmlpostgres@gmail.com> wrote: > As said in parallel.smgl: > > In a parallel sequential scan, the table's blocks will be divided among the cooperating processes. Blocks are handed out one at a time, so that access to the table remains sequential. > Shall we update the documents? Yeah, 56788d215 should have updated that. Seems I didn't expect that level of detail in the docs. I've attached a patch to address this. I didn't feel the need to go into too much detail about how the sizes of the ranges are calculated. I tried to be brief, but I think I did leave enough in there so that a reader will know that we don't just make the range length <nblocks> / <nworkers>. I'll push this soon if nobody has any other wording suggestions. Thanks for the report. David
Commits
-
Doc: fix outdated wording about parallel seq scans
- f892150076db 14.6 landed
- 536a3b87037b 15.1 landed
- 42d01f59c741 16.0 landed
-
Allocate consecutive blocks during parallel seqscans
- 56788d2156fc 14.0 cited