On 17 November 2015 at 20:08, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 4:26 AM, Thom Brown <t...@linux.com> wrote: > >> However, the first parallel seq scan shows it getting 170314 rows. >> Another run shows it getting 194165 rows. The final result is >> correct, but as you can see from the rows on the Append node (59094295 >> rows), it doesn't match the number of rows on the Gather node >> (30000000). > > Is this the same issue reported in > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAFj8pRBF-i=qdg9b5nzrxyfchzbezwmthxyphidqvwomojh...@mail.gmail.com > and not yet fixed? I am inclined to think it probably is.
Yes, that seems to be the same issue. >> And also, for some reason, I can no longer get this using more than 2 >> workers, even with max_worker_processes = 16 and max_parallel_degree = >> 12. I don't know if that's anything to do with this patch though. > > The number of workers is limited based on the size of the largest > table involved in the Append. That probably needs considerable > improvement, of course, but this patch is still a step forward over > not-this-patch. Ah, okay. I wasn't aware of this. I'll bear that in mind in future. Thom -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
