Re: parallel append vs. simple UNION ALL

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: parallel append vs. simple UNION ALL
Date: 2018-03-13 20:39:31
Message-ID: CA+TgmoaEQmQsiFqgFpxNjxvOsnL=4Fvj_rfQTi1e=mmO06zuuA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
<ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> It looks like it was not changed in all the places. make falied. I
> have fixed all the instances of these two functions in the attached
> patchset (only 0003 changes). Please check.

Oops. Thanks.

I'm going to go ahead and commit 0001 here. Any more thoughts on the rest?

--
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 Thomas Munro 2018-03-13 21:32:40 Re: JIT compiling with LLVM v11
Previous Message Chapman Flack 2018-03-13 20:28:08 Re: PATCH: Configurable file mode mask