From: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Parallel Aggregates for string_agg and array_agg |
Date: | 2018-03-29 13:09:33 |
Message-ID: | CAKJS1f-S493AXpKAiri7cSFfhy2vy5kLHzkTDXC5QzoxMJ5Lkg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 30 March 2018 at 02:00, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 03/29/2018 05:49 AM, David Rowley wrote:
>> Attached is v9, which is based on Tom's v8 but includes the new tests
>> and I think the required fix to disable use of the serial/deserial
>> function for array_agg().
>>
>
> I have only looked at the diff, but it seems fine to me (in the sense
> that it's doing the right checks to disable parallelism only when really
> needed).
>
> FWIW I wonder if we might simply fallback to input/output functions when
> the send/receive functions are not available. Not sure it's worth it.
I think it's a corner case to have a type without send/receive, but I
might just be lacking imagination.
I meant to mention earlier that I coded
agg_args_have_sendreceive_funcs() to only check for send/receive
functions. Really we could allow a byval types without send/receive
functions, since the serial/deserial just send the raw datums in that
case, but then the function becomes
agg_byref_args_have_sendreceive_funcs(), which seemed a bit obscure,
so I didn't do that. Maybe I should?
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2018-03-29 13:10:24 | Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6) |
Previous Message | David Steele | 2018-03-29 13:07:06 | Re: [HACKERS] Pluggable storage |