| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation) |
| Date: | 2018-02-03 00:31:50 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-Wzk_OY4RfiDfd_JqAG4OO54ZktOL0Z9fMvTRqK3wWj6=1A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 1:58 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Not saying you're wrong, but you should include a comment on why this is
> a benign warning. Presumably it's some padding memory somewhere, but
> it's not obvious from the above bleat.
Sure. This looks slightly more complicated than first anticipated, but
I'll keep everyone posted.
Valgrind suppression aside, this raises another question. The stack
trace shows that the error happens during the creation of a new TOAST
table (CheckAndCreateToastTable()). I wonder if I should also pass
down a flag that makes sure that parallelism is never even attempted
from that path, to match TRUNCATE's suppression of parallel index
builds during its reindexing. It really shouldn't be a problem as
things stand, but maybe it's better to be consistent about "useless"
parallel CREATE INDEX attempts, and suppress them here too.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chapman Flack | 2018-02-03 00:37:08 | pie-in-sky idea: 'sensitive' function parameters |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-02-03 00:06:01 | Re: RelOptInfo -> Relation |