Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E25036329D6 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 16:23:03 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 00654-06 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 19:22:56 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-ew0-f46.google.com (mail-ew0-f46.google.com [209.85.215.46]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28AE4632D6D for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 16:22:52 -0300 (ADT) Received: by mail-ew0-f46.google.com with SMTP id 23so3416337ewy.19 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 12:22:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=s8GR5nvmRAhHrjwRuN4KxykidfujK19+rzjqxMAOibI=; b=o68ZE7qJPoHdf6ALAuYZNaM+0HlRF0JiW/afZPWqzlHhD2dEteMp8ifGb8R4ZTDFKu hmEYbJYXbSOm4SQfacvZSkBAZhOOmB8kmeMCyB1TiGwVRvVDOAcUNCqlwvwTrH6LWh0M W6fBJ8r6a8AMZZed3cuf9hp4bCrKzoAEXv6PI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=lVbenNId9n4qs3Pu6t21rJJB6EXZNZ8f87+PYxrPmzKAbMkSWtdlpyE56oN3WVTofU milMjzr2wQWBhZObRcmvg+koyNRIw0P4AOcYP3L+LFKFLCAg/NE+SqcXbENKpMfCot/t Mxi0KteOnbZfb+kTwtpa5vW59dxx/vqdgdr1g= Received: by 10.213.29.204 with SMTP id r12mr956388ebc.19.1283196172232; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 12:22:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [0.0.0.0] (5357DA75.cable.casema.nl [83.87.218.117]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a48sm12583766eei.0.2010.08.30.12.22.50 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 30 Aug 2010 12:22:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4C7C05B2.7030207@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 21:25:38 +0200 From: Yeb Havinga User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Smith CC: Eliot Gable , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: GPU Accelerated Sorting References: <4C7BBAA1.6040808@2ndquadrant.com> In-Reply-To: <4C7BBAA1.6040808@2ndquadrant.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201008/336 X-Sequence-Number: 40179 Greg Smith wrote: > This comes up every year or so. The ability of GPU offloading to help > with sorting has to overcome the additional latency that comes from > copying everything over to it and then getting all the results back. > If you look at the typical types of sorting people see in PostgreSQL, > it's hard to find ones that are a) big enough to benefit from being > offloaded to the GPU like that, while also being b) not so > bottlenecked on disk I/O that speeding up the CPU part matters. And > if you need to sort something in that category, you probably just put > an index on it instead and call it a day. > > If you made me make a list of things I'd think would be worthwhile to > spend effort improving in PostgreSQL, this would be on the research > list, but unlikely to even make my personal top 100 things that are > work fiddling with. Related is 'Parallelizing query optimization' (http://www.vldb.org/pvldb/1/1453882.pdf) in which they actually experiment with PostgreSQL. Note that their target platform is general purpose CPU, not a SIMD GPU processor. -- Yeb