| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Rafia Sabih <rafia(dot)sabih(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve access to parallel query from procedural languages. |
| Date: | 2017-03-27 13:25:19 |
| Message-ID: | 15354.1490621119@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 1:48 AM, Rafia Sabih
> <rafia(dot)sabih(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> This is caused because trigger related functions are marked safe and
>> using global variables, hence when executed in parallel are giving
>> incorrect output.
> If it's just that they are relying on unsynchronized global variables,
> then it's sufficient to mark them parallel-restricted ('r'). Do we
> really need to go all the way to parallel-unsafe ('u')?
Color me confused, but under what circumstances would triggers get
executed by a parallel worker at all? I thought we did not allow
updating queries to be parallelized.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-03-27 13:48:52 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve access to parallel query from procedural languages. |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-03-27 12:37:34 | pgsql: Pass DSA_ALLOC_HUGE when allocating a shared TIDBitmap. |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Verite | 2017-03-27 13:28:51 | Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq |
| Previous Message | Dilip Kumar | 2017-03-27 13:03:57 | Re: Parallel bitmap heap scan |