Re: assessing parallel-safety

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> wrote:
> > Looks like one of the patches I applied is newer than the one in your
list:
> >
> > HEAD Commit-id: 13a10c0ccd984643ef88997ac177da7c4b7e46a6
> > parallel-mode-v9.patch
> > assess-parallel-safety-v4.patch
> > parallel-heap-scan.patch
> > parallel_seqscan_v11.patch
>
> This patch hasn't been updated for a while, so here is a rebased
> version now that we're hopefully mostly done making changes to
> pg_proc.h for 9.5. parallel-mode-v10 was mostly committed, and
> parallel-heap-scan has now been incorporated into the parallel_seqscan
> patch. So you should now be able to test this feature by applying
> just this patch, and the new version of the parallel seqscan patch
> which I am given to understand that Amit will be posting pretty soon.
>

This patch again needs rebase, but anyway I think this should be present
in the CF-1 as parallel seq scan patch is dependent on it. So I am moving
this to upcoming CF unless there is any objection for doing so.

I know that CF-1 time is already started, but just now realized that this
patch
should also be present in it.

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