Re: WIP: Upper planner pathification

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP: Upper planner pathification
Date: 2016-03-09 17:07:55
Message-ID: 20160309170755.GA977705@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:

> > Without setting max_parallel_degree, it works fine and generate the
> > appropriate results. Here the issue seems to be that the code in
> > grouping_planner doesn't apply the required PathTarget to Path below Gather
> > Path due to which when we generate target list for scan plan,
>
> Yeah, fixed. I had assumed that the existing coding in create_gather_plan
> was OK, because it looked like it was right for a non-projecting node.
> But actually Gather can project (why though?), so it's not right.

This looks related:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BTgmoai9Ruhwk61110rY4cNAzoO6npsFEOaEKjM7Zz8i3evHg%40mail.gmail.com

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-03-09 17:13:32 Re: Alter or rename enum value
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2016-03-09 16:58:29 Re: Alter or rename enum value