Re: Proposal : Parallel Merge Join

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal : Parallel Merge Join
Date: 2017-02-01 04:39:50
Message-ID: CAB7nPqRT_7JZyXq+R9X_Hx9Aq_z-DvX6JV7f50uU3HtzuJvNkQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Review comments:
>> 1.
>> + bool is_partial);
>> +
>>
>> Seems additional new line is not required.
> Fixed

This patch has a patch, no new reviews. Moved to CF 2017-03.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2017-02-01 04:41:03 Re: Pinning a buffer in TupleTableSlot is unnecessary
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2017-02-01 04:37:58 Re: Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation)