| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Adrien Nayrat <adrien(dot)nayrat(at)anayrat(dot)info>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Explain buffers wrong counter with parallel plans |
| Date: | 2018-05-07 17:49:35 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobCqFVxGPbHw-mGM3bmLD23ftM2GRDOC25wv3eiV+p1iA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 8:56 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> The reason why I think the current behavior is okay because it is
> coincidental that they were displayed correctly. We have not made any
> effort to percolate it to upper nodes. For ex., before that commit
> also, it was not being displayed for Gather Merge or Gather with some
> kind of node like 'Limit' where we have to stop before reaching the
> end of the result.
It's not entirely coincidental. I had the intention to try to ensure
that the workers would be shut down before the Gather or Gather Merge,
and I think that various things in the code testify to that intention.
It sounds like I missed some cases, but now we're missing even more
cases.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2018-05-07 17:52:26 | Re: Having query cache in core |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2018-05-07 17:37:09 | parallel.sgml for Gather with InitPlans |