Re: A reloption for partitioned tables - parallel_workers

From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Seamus Abshere <seamus(at)abshere(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A reloption for partitioned tables - parallel_workers
Date: 2021-03-05 14:06:11
Message-ID: ef923edda56bdcc8cce3a22a1f9fdd7b654c35d0.camel@cybertec.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 2021-03-05 at 22:55 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 10:47 PM Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2021-03-03 at 17:58 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > > For example, with the attached PoC patch:
> >
> > I have incorporated your POC patch and added a regression test.
> >
> > I didn't test it thoroughly though.
>
> Thanks. Although, I wonder if we should rather consider it a
> standalone patch to fix a partition planning code deficiency.

Oh - I didn't realize that your patch was independent.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Steele 2021-03-05 14:11:47 Re: pgbench - add pseudo-random permutation function
Previous Message David Steele 2021-03-05 14:00:45 Re: [PATCH] Finally split StdRdOptions into HeapOptions and ToastOptions