From: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com> |
Cc: | Luc Vlaming <luc(at)swarm64(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hou, Zhijie" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Parallel Inserts in CREATE TABLE AS |
Date: | 2021-01-06 03:53:16 |
Message-ID: | CALj2ACWuJHgvvtLqO=HiEr755zP=j1UfzmMXD5MxyRQTfHkx+Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 8:19 AM Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com> wrote:
> For v20-0001-Parallel-Inserts-in-CREATE-TABLE-AS.patch :
>
> ParallelInsCmdEstimate :
>
> + Assert(pcxt && ins_info &&
> + (ins_cmd == PARALLEL_INSERT_CMD_CREATE_TABLE_AS));
> +
> + if (ins_cmd == PARALLEL_INSERT_CMD_CREATE_TABLE_AS)
>
> Sinc the if condition is covered by the assertion, I wonder why the if check is still needed.
>
> Similar comment for SaveParallelInsCmdFixedInfo and SaveParallelInsCmdInfo
Thanks.
The idea is to have assertion with all the expected ins_cmd types, and
then later to have selective handling for different ins_cmds. For
example, if we add (in future) parallel insertion in Refresh
Materialized View, then the code in those functions will be something
like:
+static void
+ParallelInsCmdEstimate(ParallelContext *pcxt, ParallelInsertCmdKind ins_cmd,
+ void *ins_info)
+{
+ Assert(pcxt && ins_info &&
+ (ins_cmd == PARALLEL_INSERT_CMD_CREATE_TABLE_AS ||
+ (ins_cmd == PARALLEL_INSERT_CMD_REFRESH_MAT_VIEW));
+
+ if (ins_cmd == PARALLEL_INSERT_CMD_CREATE_TABLE_AS)
+ {
+
+ }
+ else if (ns_cmd == PARALLEL_INSERT_CMD_REFRESH_MAT_VIEW)
+ {
+
+ }
Similarly for other functions as well.
With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2021-01-06 03:55:13 | Re: Deadlock between backend and recovery may not be detected |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-01-06 03:36:58 | Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions |