Re: pgsql: Handle lack of DSM slots in parallel btree build.

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <tmunro(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-committers <pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgsql: Handle lack of DSM slots in parallel btree build.
Date: 2020-02-04 17:47:35
Message-ID: CAH2-Wz=Hf1cgb=PvMfvGYC_HnMASPxArSuOMos2rJ4i6GReqrQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers

On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 9:42 AM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> Can we reuse _bt_end_parallel() this time around? It would be easy to
> add a "bool wait" argument to _bt_end_parallel(). All existing callers
> would pass true, but when not using parallelism due to the new DSM
> segment check we'd pass false.

Hmm. I see why you didn't do it that way -- we don't quite have the
variables set up in the way that _bt_end_parallel() expects them.

This looks good, then.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-02-04 18:07:33 pgsql: Fix handling of "Subplans Removed" field in EXPLAIN output.
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2020-02-04 17:42:12 Re: pgsql: Handle lack of DSM slots in parallel btree build.