| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation) |
| Date: | 2018-01-23 21:07:00 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaF8UA8v8hP=CcoqUc50pucPC8ABj-_yyC++yGggjWFsw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 2:11 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> Finally, it's still not clear to me why nodeGather.c's use of
> parallel_leader_participation=off doesn't suffer from similar problems
> [1].
Thomas and I just concluded that it does. See my email on the other
thread just now.
I thought that I had the failure cases all nailed down here now, but I
guess not.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2018-01-23 21:07:22 | Re: WIP: BRIN multi-range indexes |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2018-01-23 21:05:21 | Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c oblivion of worker-startup failures |