Re: Improving planner's checks for parallel-unsafety

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I have reviewed this and it looks good to me. My only comment is that
>> this comment is slightly confusing:
>
>> ! * Returns the first of PROPARALLEL_UNSAFE, PROPARALLEL_RESTRICTED, or
>> ! * PROPARALLEL_SAFE that can be found in the given parsetree. We use this
>
>> "First" might be read to mean "the first one we happen to run across"
>> rather than "the earliest in list ordering".
>
> Thanks for the review. I'll reconsider how to phrase that --- have you
> any suggestions?

I think what you committed is fine.

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