| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: fixing consider_parallel for upper planner rels |
| Date: | 2016-06-27 19:50:58 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmobee1=1xMz7o=G-o8N_xHPVTQwY4=8XUR91qavxQ1n6CA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I'm not sure how to proceed here. I have asked Tom several times to
>> look at the WIP patch and offer comments, but he so far has not done
>> so.
>
> Oh, I thought you were still actively working on it. What patch do
> you want me to review?
I'm looking for an opinion on the WIP patch attached to:
It may not be correct in detail, but I'd like to know whether you
think it's going in the generally correct direction and what major
concerns you might have before spending more time on it. Also, I'd
like to know whether you think it's something we should try to put
into 9.6 or whether you think we should leave it for next cycle.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-06-27 20:03:56 | Re: fixing subplan/subquery confusion |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-06-27 19:47:30 | Re: MinMaxAggPath vs. parallel-safety |