| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Nicolas Barbier <nicolas(dot)barbier(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: a funnel by any other name |
| Date: | 2015-09-23 02:14:57 |
| Message-ID: | 20150923021457.GN295765@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > For 1, Gather makes most sense.
>
> Yeah, I'm leaning that way myself. Amit argued for "Parallel Gather"
> but I think that's overkill. There can't be a non-parallel gather,
> and long names are a pain.
"Gather" seems a pretty decent choice to me too, even if we only have a
single worker (your "1"). I don't think there's much need to
distinguish 1 from 2, is there?
We can bikeshed the other names when the time comes; the insight in the
thread is good to have.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kouhei Kaigai | 2015-09-23 02:28:05 | Re: Parallel Seq Scan |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2015-09-23 01:57:45 | Re: Less than ideal error reporting in pg_stat_statements |