| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Size of Path nodes |
| Date: | 2015-12-06 02:12:28 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobJSaN8d3pkk_RMpuxScrB4NNPRh861SbvbbnSANEmS4g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 9:11 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> here. For example, in the case of nodeSeqscan.c, almost two-thirds of
> the new lines of code are to add three additional methods that aren't
> called in parallel aware mode, and about half of the rest are due to a
> SeqScanState now having one integer field that's not part of
> ScanState, which require mechanical changes in a bunch of places ("ps"
> becomes "ss.ps"). The rest amounts to 15-20 lines of real code
> change.
Oops, bad proofreading. It should say "are ONLY called in parallel
mode", not "aren't called in parallel aware mode".
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chapman Flack | 2015-12-06 04:41:07 | a word-choice question |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-12-06 02:11:00 | Re: Size of Path nodes |