Re: asynchronous and vectorized execution

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: asynchronous and vectorized execution
Date: 2016-10-03 04:14:23
Message-ID: CAB7nPqSf8dBndoKT5DeR6FpzDUSuXN_g7uWNPQuN_A_sEwB-uw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 5:50 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
<horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> Sorry for no response, but, the answer is yes. We could be able
> to avoid the problem by managing execution state for every
> node. But it needs an additional flag in *State structs and
> manipulating on the way shuttling up and down around the
> execution tree.

Moved to next CF.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2016-10-03 04:15:41 Re: sequences and pg_upgrade
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2016-10-03 04:12:41 Re: Aggregate Push Down - Performing aggregation on foreign server