Re: assessing parallel-safety - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: assessing parallel-safety
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1JQOfG+jfxfh6nAGbj9QoKro3_x6n2FZZ3=vD8QVdW6+Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: assessing parallel-safety  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: assessing parallel-safety  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:51 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I think we may want a dedicated parallel-safe property for functions
> rather than piggybacking on provolatile, but that will probably also
> be changeable via ALTER FUNCTION, and stored rules won't get
> miraculously updated.  So this definitely can't be something we figure
> out at parse-time ... it's got to be determined later.  But at the
> moment I see no way to do that without an extra pass over the whole
> rewritten query tree.  :-(
>

If we have to go this way, then isn't it better to evaluate the same
when we are trying to create parallel path (something like in the
parallel_seq scan patch - create_parallelscan_paths())?

With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Date:
Subject: Re: How about to have relnamespace and relrole?
Next
From: Jan Urbański
Date:
Subject: Re: libpq's multi-threaded SSL callback handling is busted