| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Parallel copy |
| Date: | 2020-10-01 06:43:32 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1JsVc_vyQPmraod3vpyWgP9mfyvV56OOd94zq8jdUNPqg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 3:16 PM Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi Vignesh and Bharath,
>
> Seems like the Parallel Copy patch is regarding RI_TRIGGER_PK as
> parallel-unsafe.
> Can you explain why this is?
>
I don't think we need to restrict this case and even if there is some
reason to do so then probably the same should be mentioned in the
comments.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kasahara Tatsuhito | 2020-10-01 07:06:23 | Re: Get memory contexts of an arbitrary backend process |
| Previous Message | Matthieu Garrigues | 2020-10-01 06:41:27 | Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq |