| From: | Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Inherited UPDATE/DELETE vs async execution |
| Date: | 2021-05-13 08:00:22 |
| Message-ID: | CAPmGK15w3iYyEDraiNwuzhEfRLXY-crQgbTS0G_rAp5z9kw9NA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 3:32 PM Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:45 PM Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Here is a rebased version of the patch. I'm planning to apply this tommorow.
>
> + /*
> + * Finally, unset the async-capable flag if it is set.
> + */
>
> Would it make sense to expand here even just a bit on why we must do this?
+1 How about something like this?
"Finally, unset the async-capable flag if it is set, as we currently
don't support asynchronous execution of direct modifications."
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2021-05-13 08:20:36 | Re: Executor code - found an instance of a WHILE that should just be an IF |
| Previous Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2021-05-13 07:42:20 | Re: compute_query_id and pg_stat_statements |