On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 01:44:17PM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 at 13:21, Justin Pryzby <pry...@telsasoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'm testing with a customer's data on pg13dev and got output for which Peak
> > Memory doesn't look right/useful. I reproduced it on 565f16902.
>
> Likely the sanity of those results depends on whether you think that
> the Memory Usage reported outside of the workers is meant to be the
> sum of all processes or the memory usage for the leader backend.
>
> All that's going on here is that the Parallel Append is using some
> parallel safe paths and giving one to each worker. The 2 workers take
> the first 2 subpaths and the leader takes the third. The memory usage
> reported helps confirm that's the case.
I'm not sure there's a problem, but all the 0kB were suspicious to me.
I think you're saying that one worker alone handled each HashAgg, and the other
worker (and leader) show 0kB. I guess in my naive thinking it's odd to show a
worker which wasn't active for that subpath (at least in text output). But I
don't know the expected behavior of parallel hashagg, so that explains most of
my confusion.
On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 10:01:18PM -0400, James Coleman wrote:
> Perhaps it could also say "Participating" or "Non-participating"?
Yes, that'd help me alot :)
Also odd (to me). If I encourage more workers, there are "slots" for each
"planned" worker, even though fewer were launched:
postgres=# ALTER TABLE p3 SET (parallel_workers=11);
postgres=# SET max_parallel_workers_per_gather=11;
Finalize HashAggregate (cost=10299.64..10329.64 rows=3000 width=12) (actual
time=297.793..299.933 rows=3000 loops=1)
Group Key: p.i
Batches: 1 Memory Usage: 625kB
-> Gather (cost=2928.09..10134.64 rows=33000 width=12) (actual
time=233.398..282.429 rows=13000 loops=1)
Workers Planned: 11
Workers Launched: 7
-> Parallel Append (cost=1928.09..5834.64 rows=3000 width=12)
(actual time=214.358..232.980 rows=1625 loops=8)
-> Partial HashAggregate (cost=1933.46..1943.46 rows=1000
width=12) (actual time=167.936..171.345 rows=1000 loops=4)
Group Key: p.i
Batches: 1 Memory Usage: 0kB
Worker 0: Batches: 1 Memory Usage: 193kB
Worker 1: Batches: 1 Memory Usage: 193kB
Worker 2: Batches: 1 Memory Usage: 0kB
Worker 3: Batches: 1 Memory Usage: 0kB
Worker 4: Batches: 1 Memory Usage: 193kB
Worker 5: Batches: 1 Memory Usage: 0kB
Worker 6: Batches: 1 Memory Usage: 193kB
Worker 7: Batches: 0 Memory Usage: 0kB
Worker 8: Batches: 0 Memory Usage: 0kB
Worker 9: Batches: 0 Memory Usage: 0kB
Worker 10: Batches: 0 Memory Usage: 0kB
Thanks,
--
Justin
