Message-ID: <4F226C1D.3020905@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 11:19:25 +0200
From: Vitalii Tymchyshyn <tivv00@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
	rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111109 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.16
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Parallel Processing !
References: 
 <CAFAjSHxCuDP6cN1d1zOvFeDsFvM9HJkOSooFNTOWSKpuo-XRJw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGuFTBXYSyDHYBuvBOm5gaHtuwg6wEkSu3xB++5SxXiSpNwv=Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGTBQpbm2uSfsQ=B-ASH36dKMknnoYmJFwe+OmSqjX6X_vvgUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHyXU0zRRWrV5p1U6zAhz=95m3y4Z_9WdYBGwNuKEFX_t1ySnw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGTBQpaS1DeN8hpq=Rb4Q9JkR4JrCucwgaP1wW7T48K9tbWO0Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGuFTBWibLVRrS-yQZCvuZ_62T=DOustwtK1VaQhcQMdn1axWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABRT9RD_VXa4zEDVYoe4a0TgDFbidBC884q_2S47hyre_Sp9Sg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CABRT9RD_VXa4zEDVYoe4a0TgDFbidBC884q_2S47hyre_Sp9Sg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

27.01.12 11:06, Marti Raudsepp написав(ла):
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 06:31, sridhar bamandlapally
> <sridhar.bn1@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> | Id  | Operation         | Name | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT  |      |  7444K|   944M| 16077   (4)| 00:03:13 |
>> |   1 |  TABLE ACCESS FULL| EMP  |  7444K|   944M| 16077   (4)| 00:03:13 |
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sorry to take this off topic, but... Seriously, over 3 minutes to read
> 944 MB of data? That's less than 5 MB/s, what's wrong with your
> database? :)
Actually I'd ask how parallel CPU may help table sequence scan? Usually 
sequence scan does not take large amount of cpu time, so I see no point 
in parallelism.