On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 6:21 PM, Jeevan Chalke < jeevan.cha...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> > I see that partition-wise aggregate plan too uses parallel index, am I > missing something? > > You're right, I missed that, oops. > >> Q18 takes some 390 secs with patch and some 147 secs without it. >> > > This looks strange. This patch set does not touch parallel or seq scan as > such. I am not sure why this is happening. All these three queries explain > plan shows much higher execution time for parallel/seq scan. > > Yeah strange it is. > However, do you see similar behaviour with patches applied, > "enable_partition_wise_agg = on" and "enable_partition_wise_agg = off" ? > I tried that for query 18, with patch and enable_partition_wise_agg = off, query completes in some 270 secs. You may find the explain analyse output for it in the attached file. I noticed that on head the query plan had parallel hash join however with patch and no partition-wise agg it is using nested loop joins. This might be the issue. > > Also, does rest of the queries perform better with partition-wise > aggregates? > > As far as this setting goes, there wasn't any other query using partition-wise-agg, so, no. BTW, just an FYI, this experiment is on scale factor 20. -- Regards, Rafia Sabih EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com/
18_pwa_off.out
Description: Binary data
