Re: BUG #18588: Cannot force/let database use parallel execution in simple case.
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #18588: Cannot force/let database use parallel execution in simple case. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2059550.1724353316@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #18588: Cannot force/let database use parallel execution in simple case. (Maxim Boguk <maxim.boguk@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #18588: Cannot force/let database use parallel execution in simple case.
Re: BUG #18588: Cannot force/let database use parallel execution in simple case. |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Maxim Boguk <maxim.boguk@gmail.com> writes: > Ok there are reproducer test case on the stock postgresql 16.4 config: Hmm, you can see both behaviors on the small version of t1, just by varying the comparison constant in the WHERE clause. For me, it'll use only one worker with "where a<1", and not parallelize at all with "where a<0". It looks like it's deciding that it's not worth starting workers when too few rows are expected to be returned. That would be unsurprising with a normal setting of parallel_setup_cost, but it does seem odd with parallel_setup_cost=0. In any case, I think this isn't about the big table being big but about changing the range of values of "a", which changes the selectivity of "where a<10" 100-fold. (I tested on HEAD not v16) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: