Any chance of having query parallelization added to TODO? I'm guessing it will be a huge job, but it's also one of the places where the 'big 3' have a huge advantage in scalability.
On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 10:24:05AM -0700, Sailesh Krishnamurthy wrote: > >>>>> "CB" == Christopher Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > CB> futile discussions ask for it. Notably, on an SMP system, it > CB> would be a neat idea for complex queries involving joins to > CB> split themselves so that different parts run in separate > CB> threads. > > You don't really need threads for this. All you need is to have > multiple backends and use queues to exchange tuples at specific > points. This is much like the Exchange operator in Volcano. > > CB> The other Way, Way Cool part would be for queries that are > CB> scanning big tables to split the scans into unions of partial > CB> scans, so that on an 8 CPU box you'd take the "Big 4GB Table" > CB> and have 8 threads simultaneously scanning different parts of > CB> it. (And making ARC all the more important :-).) > > Again this can be done without threads .. you just need inter-process > communication. > > (BTW, there is at least one commercial system that follows exactly > this model). > > -- > Pip-pip > Sailesh > http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~sailesh > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster > -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828 Windows: "Where do you want to go today?" Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?" FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?" ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
