From: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: parallelize queries containing subplans |
Date: | 2017-01-12 06:41:39 |
Message-ID: | CAFiTN-tTU2Jtaq+_p+vaa=Fka38+hsJFWQPNexEUrBHtH8FiKg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Valid point, but I think we can avoid that by returning false after
> foreach(..) loop. I think one improvement could be that instead of
> manually checking the parallel safety of each subplan, we can
> recursively call max_parallel_hazard_walker for each subplan.
I agree that this way we can avoid the problem what I mentioned.
>
>
>> But, more than that it will be cleaner to not
>> handle AlternativeSubPlan here unless there is some strong reason?
>>
>
> Yeah, the reason is to avoid unnecessary recursion. Also, in all
> other places in the code, we do handle both of them separately, refer
> cost_qual_eval_walker for somewhat similar usage.
ok.
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Devrim Gündüz | 2017-01-12 07:46:42 | Re: Retiring from the Core Team |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2017-01-12 06:02:22 | Re: Retiring from the Core Team |