Re: Parallel safety tagging of extension functions

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 8:41 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> - Do you think we should add PARALLEL UNSAFE to the functions which we know
>> are unsafe to make it obvious that it is intentional?
>
> That seems likely unnecessary churn from here.

A general point here is that there's no point in marking a function
PARALLEL SAFE unless it's going to be referenced in a query. So for
example I'm pretty sure the parallel markings on blhandler() don't
matter at all, and therefore there's no need to update the bloom
contrib module. Yeah, that function might get called, but it's not
going to be mentioned textually in the query.

I think this patch can get somewhat smaller if you update it that way.
I suggest merging the function and aggregate stuff together and
instead splitting this by contrib module.

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