On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:08:45AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes:
> I'd vote for PARALLEL UNSAFE myself. Otherwise you have to ask questions
> about whether it's really safe to do this while parallel workers are doing
> things. Perhaps the answer is "yes", but what's the point of having to
> verify that?
All the backup-related functions doing on-disk activity are marked as
parallel-restricted:
=# select proparallel, proname from pg_proc where proname ~ 'backup';
proparallel | proname
-------------+----------------------
s | pg_is_in_backup
s | pg_backup_start_time
r | pg_stop_backup
r | pg_start_backup
r | pg_stop_backup
(5 rows)
As restricted, only the group leader is allowed to execute the
function. So as long as we enforce the execution uniqueness, I don't
think that there is any point in enforcing a serial scan for the whole
query. Queries launching pg_promote are unlikely going to be much
complicated, still it does not seem a consistent experience to me to not
use the same level for such operations.
--
Michael
