Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query
Date
Msg-id 6397.1443112549@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> Also, it's not like this change couldn't be UN-done at a future point.
> I mean, Tom didn't like the flag I added aesthetically, but if we
> needed it, we could have it.  Or we could engineer something else.

For the record: that's true for the patch you just committed.  But once
I remove the hopefully-now-dead planner support for recomputing opfuncid,
it would get a lot more painful to reverse the decision.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: DBT-3 with SF=20 got failed