On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > Your reasoning sounds sensible to me. I think the other way to attack > this problem is that we can maintain some local queue in each of the > workers when the shared memory queue becomes full. Basically, we can > extend your "Faster processing at Gather node" patch [1] such that > instead of fixed sized local queue, we can extend it when the shm > queue become full. I think that way we can handle both the problems > (worker won't stall if shm queues are full and workers can do batched > writes in shm queue to avoid the shm queue communication overhead) in > a similar way.
We still have to bound the amount of memory that we use for queueing data in some way. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
