Re: Explain buffers wrong counter with parallel plans - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Explain buffers wrong counter with parallel plans
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoaK-xSRXRo=6W9UTshcGXOM78Y4NoKESxVeYo+8nL46kg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Explain buffers wrong counter with parallel plans  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Explain buffers wrong counter with parallel plans  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have tried this idea, but it doesn't completely solve the problem.
> The problem is that nodes below LIMIT won't get a chance to accumulate
> the stats as they won't be able to call InstrStopNode.

I'm not sure I understand.  Why not?  I see that we'd need to insert
an extra call to InstrStopNode() if we were stopping the node while it
was running, because then InstrStartNode() would have already been
done, but the corresponding call to InstrStopNode() would not have
been done.  But I'm not sure how that would happen in this case.  Can
you explain further?

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


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: shared-memory based stats collector
Next
From: Dave Cramer
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_recvlogical use of SIGHUP