Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Append implementation

On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 5:05 PM, Thomas Munro
<thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> + scanning them more than once would preduce duplicate results. Plans that
>
> s/preduce/produce/

Fixed, thanks.

> + <literal>Append</literal> or <literal>MergeAppend</literal> plan node.
> vs.
> + Append</literal> of regular <literal>Index Scan</literal> plans; each
>
> I think we should standardise on <literal>Foo Bar</literal>,
> <literal>FooBar</literal> or <emphasis>foo bar</emphasis> when
> discussing executor nodes on this page.

Well, EXPLAIN prints MergeAppend but Index Scan, and I think we should
follow that precedent here.

As for <emphasis> vs. <literal>, I think the reason I ended up using
<emphasis> in the section on scans was because I thought that
<literal>Parallel Seq Scan</literal> might be confusing (what's a
"seq"?), so I tried to fudge my way around that by referring to it as
an abstract idea rather than the exact EXPLAIN output. You then
copied that style in the join section, and, well, like you say, now we
have a sort of hodgepodge of styles. Maybe that's a problem for
another patch, though.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company