Re: COPY (query) TO ... doesn't allow parallelism

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: COPY (query) TO ... doesn't allow parallelism
Date: 2017-06-01 16:07:56
Message-ID: CAA4eK1J1j_z2Aw3OpVigv9EScJvxAnYOrkV5=T4Dph_==sYjew@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 9:34 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2017-06-01 21:23:04 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> On a related note, I think it might be better to have an
>> IsInParallelMode() check in this case as we have at other places.
>> This is to ensure that if this command is invoked via plpgsql function
>> and that function runs is the parallel mode, it will act as a
>> safeguard.
>
> Hm? Which other places do it that way? Isn't standard_planner()
> centralizing such a check?
>

heap_insert->heap_prepare_insert, heap_update, heap_delete, etc.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2017-06-01 16:11:13 Re: [JDBC] Channel binding support for SCRAM-SHA-256
Previous Message Andres Freund 2017-06-01 16:04:28 Re: COPY (query) TO ... doesn't allow parallelism