Re: [bug?] Missed parallel safety checks, and wrong parallel safety

On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 9:47 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 2:43 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > There are specific cases where there's a good reason to worry.
> > For example, if we assume blindly that domain_in() is parallel
> > safe, we will have cause to regret that. But I don't find that
> > to be a reason why we need to lock down everything everywhere.
> > We need to understand the tradeoffs involved in what we check,
> > and apply checks that are likely to avoid problems, while not
> > being too nanny-ish.
>
> Yeah, that's exactly how I feel about it, too.
>

Fair enough. So, I think there is a consensus to drop this patch and
if one wants then we can document these cases. Also, we don't want it
to enable parallelism for Inserts where we are trying to pursue the
approach to have a flag in pg_class which allows users to specify
whether writes are allowed on a specified relation.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.