Re: Asynchronous Append on postgres_fdw nodes.
От | Andrey Lepikhov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Asynchronous Append on postgres_fdw nodes. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | c4ec1aa8-282a-f497-d544-e0668486cd53@postgrespro.ru обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Asynchronous Append on postgres_fdw nodes. (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 6/5/21 22:12, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Etsuro Fujita (etsuro.fujita@gmail.com) wrote: >> I think the user should be careful about this. How about adding a >> note about it to the “Asynchronous Execution Options” section in >> postgres-fdw.sgml, like the attached? +1 > ... then again, it'd really be better if we could figure out a way to > just do the right thing here. I haven't looked at this in depth but I > would think that the overhead of async would be well worth it just about > any time there's more than one foreign server involved. Is it not > reasonable to have a heuristic where we disable async in the cases where > there's only one foreign server, but have it enabled all the other time? > While continuing to allow users to manage it explicitly if they want. Bechmarking of SELECT from foreign partitions hosted on the same server, i see results: With async append: 1 partition - 178 ms; 4 - 263; 8 - 450; 16 - 860; 32 - 1740. Without: 1 - 178 ms; 4 - 583; 8 - 1140; 16 - 2302; 32 - 4620. So, these results show that we have a reason to use async append in the case where there's only one foreign server. -- regards, Andrey Lepikhov Postgres Professional
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: