Re: pg_promote not marked as parallel-restricted in pg_proc.dat - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Laurenz Albe
Subject Re: pg_promote not marked as parallel-restricted in pg_proc.dat
Date
Msg-id 26756b63fc9662fc3d54e762460c8c1562d7c14a.camel@cybertec.at
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_promote not marked as parallel-restricted in pg_proc.dat  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: pg_promote not marked as parallel-restricted in pg_proc.dat  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 09:41:08AM +0100, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > I think that the question if pg_promote allows a parallel plan or not
> > is mostly academic, but the two definitions should be kept in sync.
> 
> It seems to me that the presence of the trigger file written in $PGDATA
> means that the function should be restricted.

Yes, it should be PARALLEL RESTRICTED or PARALLEL UNSAFE, but it won't matter
much in practice which of the two we choose.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alexey Kondratov
Date:
Subject: Re: [Patch] pg_rewind: options to use restore_command fromrecovery.conf or command line
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: New vacuum option to do only freezing