public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: Neto pr <[email protected]>
Cc: Igor Neyman <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Explain Analyze - actual time in loops
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2017 09:44:49 -0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+wPC0ObeUigZk3Vf_EVtozKUoCcd91FDFUd4VR4L_3LkY6bbA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+wPC0OXdN+_8HxhYMWyV9nfD8v+xChvLROiWCiRo=qSve2MjQ@mail.gmail.com>
<DM5PR17MB14993F6FD18158C593907D85DA950@DM5PR17MB1499.namprd17.prod.outlook.com>
<CA+wPC0ObeUigZk3Vf_EVtozKUoCcd91FDFUd4VR4L_3LkY6bbA@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?body=unsub%20pgsql-performance>
Neto pr <[email protected]> writes:
> After analyzing, I saw that in some places of the plan, it is being used
> Parallelism. Does this explain why the final value spent (in minutes) to go
> through the index (184 minutes) is greater than the total query time (66
> minutes)?
I was just about to ask you about that. If this is under a Gather node,
I believe that the numbers include time expended in all processes.
So if you had three or more workers these results would make sense.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
reply
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: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Explain Analyze - actual time in loops
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox