Re: parallel append vs. simple UNION ALL

From: Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar(dot)raghuwanshi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Subject: Re: parallel append vs. simple UNION ALL
Date: 2018-03-16 11:35:48
Message-ID: CAKcux6nQB7J=ya8mJJiT2BX5nHWEaym+u97P6oJkf02P=dVXiA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 1:04 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> Great. Committed 0001. Are you planning any further testing of this
> patch series?

Sorry I missed the mail.
Yes, I have further tested patches and find no more issues.

Thanks & Regards,
Rajkumar Raghuwanshi
QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Etsuro Fujita 2018-03-16 11:37:24 Re: inserts into partitioned table may cause crash
Previous Message Robert Haas 2018-03-16 11:16:10 Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions