From: Jim C. Nasby <jnasby@pervasive.com>
To: Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Read/Write block sizes
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 15:57:44 -0500
Message-ID: <20050824205744.GX96732@pervasive.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <60br3npb4p.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com>
References: <d4b67d7c2b.d7c2bd4b67@bur-mail1.east.sun.com>
<60k6icpapm.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com>
<1124846743.12045.94.camel@amd64-laptop-spoe>
<60br3npb4p.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com>
On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 12:12:22PM -0400, Chris Browne wrote:
> Everyone involved in development seems to me to have a reasonably keen
> understanding as to what the potential benefits of threading are; the
> value is that there fall out plenty of opportunities to parallelize
> the evaluation of portions of queries. Alas, it wouldn't be until
> *after* all the effort goes in that we would get any idea as to what
> kinds of speedups this would provide.
My understanding is that the original suggestion was to use threads
within individual backends to allow for parallel query execution, not
swiching to a completely thread-based model.
In any case, there are other ways to enable parallelism without using
threads, such as handing actual query execution off to a set of
processes.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com 512-569-9461
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-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: jnasby@pervasive.com, cbbrowne@acm.org
Subject: Re: Read/Write block sizes
In-Reply-To: <20050824205744.GX96732@pervasive.com>
* 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