| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SQL-standard function body |
| Date: | 2021-04-08 03:28:34 |
| Message-ID: | YG54YggzyPrTFE+e@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 04:22:17PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Buildfarm suggests this has some issues under force_parallel_mode.
> I'm wondering about missed fields in outfuncs/readfuncs, or the like.
The problem looks a bit more fundamental to me, as there seems to be
some confusion with the concept of what should be the query string
when it comes to prosqlbody with a parallel run, as it replaces prosrc
in some cases where the function uses SQL as language. If the
buildfarm cannot be put back to green, could it be possible to revert
this patch?
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Langote | 2021-04-08 03:32:43 | Re: ModifyTable overheads in generic plans |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2021-04-08 03:27:04 | Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId for pg_catalog.pg_stat_activity view? |