Re: Performance degradation in Bitmapscan (commit 75ae538bc3168bf44475240d4e0487ee2f3bb376)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Dilip Kumar
Тема Re: Performance degradation in Bitmapscan (commit 75ae538bc3168bf44475240d4e0487ee2f3bb376)
Дата
Msg-id CAFiTN-soU=xg=BQw7qNfwmfyHD_L03-17a3hUzDDkXUQ68q_9w@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Performance degradation in Bitmapscan (commit 75ae538bc3168bf44475240d4e0487ee2f3bb376)  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 12:58 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> It's not really related to lossy pages, it's just that due to deletions
> / insertions a lot more "shapes" of the hashtable are hit.
Okay..
>
> I suspect that this is with parallelism disabled? Without that the query
> ends up using a parallel sequential scan for me.
>

It's with max_parallel_worker_per_gather=2, I always noticed that Q6
takes parallel seq scan only for
max_parallel_worker_per_gather=4 or more..
>
> I've a working fix for this, and for a similar issue Robert found. I'm
> still playing around with it, but basically the fix is to make the
> growth policy a bit more adaptive.

Okay.. Thanks.


-- 
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Ashutosh Bapat
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_hba_file_settings view patch
Следующее
От: Magnus Hagander
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Snapshot too old logging