Re: auto_explain vs. parallel query - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: auto_explain vs. parallel query
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYfFL-J6usNbSafpW6Fy4t-GVBL=+_WBYhfX40tCMvm-w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: auto_explain vs. parallel query  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: auto_explain vs. parallel query
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Tomas Vondra
<tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Damn! You're right of course. Who'd guess I need more coffee this early?
>
> Attached is a fix replacing the flag with an array of flags, indexed by
> ParallelMasterBackendId. Hopefully that makes it work with multiple
> concurrent parallel queries ... still, I'm not sure this is the right
> solution.

I feel like it isn't.  I feel like this ought to go in the DSM for
that parallel query, not the main shared memory segment, but I'm not
sure how to accomplish that offhand.  Also, if we do solve it this
way, surely we don't need the locking.  The flag's only set before any
workers have started and never changes thereafter.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Haribabu Kommi
Date:
Subject: commitfest 2016-11 status summary
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: pageinspect: Hash index support