| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: RFC: split OBJS lines to one object per line |
| Date: | 2019-11-08 09:07:57 |
| Message-ID: | 20191108090757.GD1768@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 12:02:04PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I don't think it'd be a great idea to change parallel_schedule like
> that. Independently adding test scripts to the same parallel batch
> probably won't end well: you might end up over the concurrency limit,
> or the scripts might conflict through sharing table names or the like.
> So I'd rather see that there's a conflict to worry about.
>
> Anyway, merge conflicts there aren't so common IME.
FWIW, I was not referring to the schedule files here, just to REGRESS
and ISOLATION in the modules' Makefiles. If you think that's not
worth doing it, let's drop my suggestion then.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gilles Darold | 2019-11-08 09:19:01 | Re: [PATCH][DOC] Fix for PREPARE TRANSACTION doc and postgres_fdw message. |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-11-08 09:05:07 | Re: [PATCH][DOC] Fix for PREPARE TRANSACTION doc and postgres_fdw message. |