| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: postgres_fdw vs. force_parallel_mode on ppc |
| Date: | 2016-02-24 07:29:58 |
| Message-ID: | CAEepm=25q3m-7p5q+NpHzgbVP5cvRwujC+YxRZQ=2DXyvFLPnA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Thomas Munro
<thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Here is a first pass at that. [...]
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 1:23 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> file_fdw is parallel-safe, ...
And here is a patch to apply on top of the last one, to make file_fdw
return true. But does it really work correctly under parallelism?
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| file-fdw-parallel-safe.patch | application/octet-stream | 1.2 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Langote | 2016-02-24 08:11:04 | Re: Declarative partitioning |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-02-24 07:06:10 | Re: silent data loss with ext4 / all current versions |