| From: | Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: asynchronous execution |
| Date: | 2017-03-10 23:19:25 |
| Message-ID: | CADkLM=eHssZhc2tC4t6C=8uGn2LV=NE6LuzavZc3+=mFW0AC0A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 6:59 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <
horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> 9e43e87
Patch fails on current master, but correctly applies to 9e43e87. Thanks for
including the commit id.
Regression tests pass.
As with my last attempt at reviewing this patch, I'm confused about what
kind of queries can take advantage of this patch. Is it only cases where a
local table has multiple inherited foreign table children? Will it work
with queries where two foreign tables are referenced and combined with a
UNION ALL?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-03-10 23:40:14 | Re: Upgrading postmaster's log messages about bind/listen errors |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2017-03-10 23:01:00 | Re: Should we eliminate or reduce HUP from docs? |