Re: explain analyze output with parallel workers - question about meaning of information for explain.depesz.com

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Hubert Lubaczewski <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers mailing list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: explain analyze output with parallel workers - question about meaning of information for explain.depesz.com
Date: 2017-12-06 06:07:18
Message-ID: CAA4eK1Jbe9pjc65c2FG2e6X_Xc=CTDBReMDV6LZ6UbAyyK9q0A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 12:39 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Yeah, that sounds better, so modified the patch accordingly.
>
> I committed this to master and REL_10_STABLE, but it conflicts all
> over the place on 9.6.
>

I will try to prepare the patch for 9.6, but I think it might be
better if we first decide what to do about the open issue for sort and
hash node as there can be some overlap based on what approach we
choose to fix it.

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message amul sul 2017-12-06 06:15:17 Re: pgsql: Support Parallel Append plan nodes.
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2017-12-06 06:05:09 Re: explain analyze output with parallel workers - question about meaning of information for explain.depesz.com