| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alastair McKinley <a(dot)mckinley(at)analyticsengines(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jeremy Smith <jeremy(at)musicsmith(dot)net>, Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Explain says 8 workers planned, only 1 executed |
| Date: | 2020-03-22 03:25:53 |
| Message-ID: | 1854.1584847553@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Alastair McKinley <a(dot)mckinley(at)analyticsengines(dot)com> writes:
> Thanks for solving the mystery. I think this might be a missing point in section 15.2 in the docs.
> I wonder will this ever be improved or should I just write to temporary tables instead of return query?
I just posted a patch to improve that [1], but it's not something we'd be
likely to back-patch into existing releases.
regards, tom lane
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1741.1584847383%40sss.pgh.pa.us
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter J. Holzer | 2020-03-22 11:27:33 | Re: Could postgres12 support millions of sequences? (like 10 million) |
| Previous Message | pabloa98 | 2020-03-21 23:41:05 | Re: Could postgres12 support millions of sequences? (like 10 million) |