Re: why not parallel seq scan for slow functions

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: why not parallel seq scan for slow functions
Date: 2017-11-09 19:42:17
Message-ID: CA+TgmoY6mGWNBJOxYqUFh97BEr=mxZ-+2zULPNt7GYyuZWxe0g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 3:47 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I think I understood your concern after some offlist discussion and it
> is primarily due to the inheritance related check which can skip the
> generation of gather paths when it shouldn't. So what might fit
> better here is a straight check on the number of base rels such that
> allow generating gather path in set_rel_pathlist, if there are
> multiple baserels involved. I have used all_baserels which I think
> will work better for this purpose.

Yes, that looks a lot more likely to be correct.

Let's see what Tom thinks.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Emre Hasegeli 2017-11-09 19:55:33 Re: [PATCH] Improve geometric types
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-11-09 19:39:06 Re: Simplify ACL handling for large objects and removal of superuser() checks