Re: [HACKERS] asynchronous execution - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Antonin Houska
Subject Re: [HACKERS] asynchronous execution
Date
Msg-id 4579.1498638234@localhost
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] asynchronous execution  (Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] asynchronous execution  (Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

> The patch got conflicted. This is a new version just rebased to
> the current master. Furtuer amendment will be taken later.

Can you please explain this part of make_append() ?

/* Currently async on partitioned tables is not available */
Assert(nasyncplans == 0 || partitioned_rels == NIL);

I don't think the output of Append plan is supposed to be ordered even if the
underlying relation is partitioned. Besides ordering, is there any other
reason not to use the asynchronous execution?

And even if there was some, the planner should ensure that executor does not
fire the assertion statement above. The script attached shows an example how
to cause the assertion failure.

--
Antonin Houska
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
Gröhrmühlgasse 26
A-2700 Wiener Neustadt
Web: http://www.postgresql-support.de, http://www.cybertec.at


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Beena Emerson
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Default Partition for Range
Next
From: Lelisa Diriba
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] building Postgresql-9.0.10