| From: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Cc: | amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: asynchronous and vectorized execution |
| Date: | 2016-10-03 04:25:17 |
| Message-ID: | 20161003.132517.02908290.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
At Mon, 3 Oct 2016 13:14:23 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in <CAB7nPqSf8dBndoKT5DeR6FpzDUSuXN_g7uWNPQuN_A_sEwB-uw(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 5:50 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> > Sorry for no response, but, the answer is yes. We could be able
> > to avoid the problem by managing execution state for every
> > node. But it needs an additional flag in *State structs and
> > manipulating on the way shuttling up and down around the
> > execution tree.
>
> Moved to next CF.
Thank you.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-10-03 04:26:53 | Re: Declarative partitioning - another take |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-10-03 04:24:42 | Re: NOT EXIST for PREPARE |