Re: Parallel Index-only scan

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> I reviewed the patch. Overall it looks fine to me.
>
> One comment,
>
> >- if (index->amcanparallel &&
> >- !index_only_scan &&
> >+ if ((index->amcanparallel ||
> >+ index_only_scan) &&
>
> Why do we need to check for index_only_scan in the above condition. IIUC,
> index->amcanparallel is necessary for
> parallel index scan to be chosen. We cannot chose parallel index only scan
> if index_only_scan is happening
> without worrying about index->amcanparallel value. So OR-ing
> index->amcanparallel with index_only_scan is probably not
> correct.
>
> True, we do not need this, only removing !index_only_scan should work.
Fixed

>
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:06 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> This again needs minor rebasing but basically looks fine. It's a
>> pretty straightforward extension of the parallel index scan work.
>>
>> Please make sure that this is pgindent-clean - i.e. that when you
>> pgindent the files that it touches, pgindent doesn't change anything
>> of the same parts of the file that you've changed in the patch. Also,
>> I believe Amit may have made some adjustments to the logic in
>> nodeIndexScan.c; if so, it would be good to make sure that the
>> nodeIndexOnlyScan.c changes match what was done there. In particular,
>> he's got this:
>>
>> if (reset_parallel_scan && node->iss_ScanDesc->parallel_s
>> can)
>> index_parallelrescan(node->iss_ScanDesc);
>>
>> And you've got this:
>>
>> + if (reset_parallel_scan)
>> + index_parallelrescan(node->ioss_ScanDesc);
>>
>
Fixed.
Please find the attached patch for rebased and cleaner version.

--
Regards,
Rafia Sabih
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com/