| From: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Regression tests vs SERIALIZABLE |
| Date: | 2021-03-15 05:14:12 |
| Message-ID: | CALj2ACV-mKBmtficzAqgzkWgsdXRsmuHFr6U-j9Gd3Jz6ASy2Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 9:54 AM Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> While reviewing the patch for parallel REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW, I
> noticed that select_parallel.sql and write_parallel.sql believe that
> (1) the tests are supposed to work with serializable as a default
> isolation level, and (2) parallelism would be inhibited by that, so
> they'd better use something else explicitly. Here's a patch to update
> that second thing in light of commit bb16aba5. I don't think it
> matters enough to bother back-patching it.
+1, patch basically LGTM. I have one point - do we also need to remove
"begin isolation level repeatable read;" in aggreates.sql, explain.sql
and insert_parallel.sql? And in insert_parallel.sql, the comment also
says "Serializable isolation would disable parallel query", which is
not true after bb16aba5. Do we need to change that too?
With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2021-03-15 05:33:29 | Re: Regression tests vs SERIALIZABLE |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2021-03-15 05:08:22 | Re: Consider Parallelism While Planning For REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW |