| From: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: crashes due to setting max_parallel_workers=0 |
| Date: | 2017-03-26 23:43:22 |
| Message-ID: | CAKJS1f_-c9ZwepOMJF+P9HL_7V_4LKtV0htFjJgO7JjEVAf2nA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 27 March 2017 at 10:23, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> I'm not sure we need to invent a new magic value, though. Can we simply look
> at force_parallel_mode, and if it's 'regress' then tread 0 differently?
see standard_planner()
if (force_parallel_mode != FORCE_PARALLEL_OFF && best_path->parallel_safe)
{
Gather *gather = makeNode(Gather);
Probably force_parallel_mode is good for testing the tuple queue code,
and some code in Gather, but I'm not quite sure what else its good
for. Certainly not GatherMerge.
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-03-27 00:05:14 | Re: Speedup twophase transactions |
| Previous Message | Venkata B Nagothi | 2017-03-26 23:34:36 | Re: patch proposal |