Re: Parallel copy

From: vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Parallel copy
Date: 2020-10-07 18:48:42
Message-ID: CALDaNm1GUNOpPoz8imngX1_0f5k8W-YNZ7oE7B9PyRGe_vWU+w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 3:16 PM Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi Vignesh and Bharath,
>
> Seems like the Parallel Copy patch is regarding RI_TRIGGER_PK as
> parallel-unsafe.
> Can you explain why this is?

Yes we don't need to restrict parallelism for RI_TRIGGER_PK cases as
we don't do any command counter increments while performing PK checks
as opposed to RI_TRIGGER_FK/foreign key checks. We have modified this
in the v6 patch set.

Regards,
Vignesh
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message vignesh C 2020-10-07 18:56:47 Re: Parallel copy
Previous Message vignesh C 2020-10-07 18:44:00 Re: Parallel copy