From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Simplify plpgsql's check for simple expressions. |
Date: | 2017-08-16 15:56:34 |
Message-ID: | 26168.1502898994@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Well, it has subplans, so formally I think it's restricted not unsafe
>> --- but the parallel_safe marking on constructed paths/plans is only
>> safe/not-safe, not a three-way.
> True, but when parallel_safe it not set, that means it's not
> parallel-safe, so either parallel-restricted or parallel-unsafe. But
> if parallelModeOK is true, then it had better be parallel-restricted,
> not parallel-unsafe.
Ah, I see.
> So I still don't see what's wrong here, other than that the comment is
> evidently not half clear enough.
I can get on board with that statement. Can you draft a better wording?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-08-16 16:17:31 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Simplify plpgsql's check for simple expressions. |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-08-16 15:22:29 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Simplify plpgsql's check for simple expressions. |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-08-16 15:57:57 | Re: Hash Functions |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-08-16 15:51:32 | Re: Refactoring identifier checks to consistently use strcmp |