Re: Parallel Seq Scan

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 11:34 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 11:59 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Isn't it better to destroy the memory for readers array as that gets
> >> > allocated
> >> > even if there are no workers available for execution?
> >> >
> >> > Attached patch fixes the issue by just destroying readers array.
> >>
> >> Well, then you're making ExecGatherShutdownWorkers() not a no-op any
> >> more. I'll go commit a combination of your two patches.
> >>
> >
> > Thanks!
>
> There is still an entry in the CF app for this thread as "Parallel Seq
> scan". The basic infrastructure has been committed, and I understand
> that this is a never-ending tasks and that there will be many
> optimizations. Still, are you guys fine to switch this entry as
> committed for now?
>

I am fine with it. I think the further optimizations can be done
separately.

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