| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Subject: | Re: [DESIGN] ParallelAppend |
| Date: | 2015-11-19 08:53:26 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1LTaPfpCW2V=3k7XrLsLNKUVY9H0c_CMaO1aR=QkyB6hw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 12:27 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> -
> Is the main reason to have add_partial_path() is that it has some
> less checks or is it that current add_path will give wrong answers
> in any case?
>
> If there is no case where add_path can't work, then there is some
> advanatge in retaining add_path() atleast in terms of maintining
> the code.
To be specific, I mean to say about the logic of add_path().
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Langote | 2015-11-19 09:13:19 | Re: Selective logical replication |
| Previous Message | konstantin knizhnik | 2015-11-19 08:48:20 | Selective logical replication |