Re: Wait for parallel workers to attach

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Wait for parallel workers to attach
Date: 2018-02-02 02:48:14
Message-ID: CAA4eK1+J+iqR3qE03fFHK2kNB+CNF6Q7oBads7zj=7caROFejw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 9:09 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 10:08 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I think suggesting to use this API to wait "for a specific worker"
>> doesn't seem like a good idea as it doesn't have any such provision.
>
> I see your point, but in the absence of a more specific API it could
> be used that way, and it wouldn't be unreasonable. Just might wait a
> little longer than absolutely necessary.
>

Fair enough, you can proceed with the patch.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2018-02-02 03:28:11 Re: proposal: alternative psql commands quit and exit
Previous Message Tsunakawa, Takayuki 2018-02-02 02:47:27 [bug fix] ECPG: freeing memory for pgtypes crashes on Windows