Re: Proposal : Parallel Merge Join

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal : Parallel Merge Join
Date: 2017-03-01 06:31:50
Message-ID: CAA4eK1K6UwWpAKVoyKqC4QnxespbyeH6o04UQmdPam7A38mVEw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I think for now we can keep the parallel safety check for cheapest
>> inner path, though it will be of use only for the very first time we
>> compare the paths in that loop. I am not sure if there is any other
>> better way to handle the same.
>
> Done that way.
>

Thanks, your patch looks good to me.

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2017-03-01 07:15:15 Re: Time to drop old-style (V0) functions?
Previous Message Andres Freund 2017-03-01 06:30:16 Re: [GENERAL] C++ port of Postgres