Re: Proposal : Parallel Merge Join
Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>
From: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-02-28T15:58:51Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > Okay, but in that case don't you think it is better to consider the > parallel safety of cheapest_total_inner only when we don't find any > cheap parallel_safe innerpath by reducing the sort keys? Well, we can do that but suppose cheapest_total_inner is not parallel safe and we do not get any parallel safe path which is cheaper than cheapest_total_inner, then we just end up making the merge join path with the cheapest parallel safe path but we might have missed some of the paths whose pathkey is covering more ordered keys. Still, it's hard to argue what it better because we can always say that if we try only cheapest parallel safe path we will generate fewer paths. -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Commits
-
Consider parallel merge joins.
- 3bc7dafa9beb 10.0 landed
-
Preparatory refactoring for parallel merge join support.
- a71f10189dc1 10.0 landed
-
Fix parallel hash join path search.
- 655393a022bd 10.0 landed