From: Zhang Mingli <zmlpostgres@gmail.com>
To: Ba Jinsheng <bajinsheng@u.nus.edu>
To: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me>
Subject: Re: Question of Parallel Hash Join on TPC-H Benchmark
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2024 22:47:00 +0800
Message-ID: <3c7df680-97e6-4f20-ab27-65fb8282f95e@Spark> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20f9671d-6f40-429b-a749-a2f53086e0dd@vondra.me>
References: <SEZPR06MB64945FE5A48A367A8C0EE8FC8A782@SEZPR06MB6494.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com>
<SEZPR06MB6494C5B80077EC08B21772888A782@SEZPR06MB6494.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com>
<20f9671d-6f40-429b-a749-a2f53086e0dd@vondra.me>
Hi,
Zhang Mingli
www.hashdata.xyz
On Oct 10, 2024 at 22:41 +0800, Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me>, wrote:
>
> You can try setting parallel_setup_cost and parallel_tuple_cost to 0,
> and reducing min_parallel_{table,index}_scan_size. That should force a
> parallel plan, and you'll see if parallelism is helpful.
In addition to this, it seems you’r eager a parallel-aware HashJoin.
Check if enable_parallel_hash = on, an explain(verbose) will show related GUCs.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Cc: zmlpostgres@gmail.com, bajinsheng@u.nus.edu, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org, tomas@vondra.me
Subject: Re: Question of Parallel Hash Join on TPC-H Benchmark
In-Reply-To: <3c7df680-97e6-4f20-ab27-65fb8282f95e@Spark>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox