On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 2:02 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 12:59 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> When I tried back-porting the patch to v10 I discovered that the
> plpgsql changes conflict heavily and that ripping them out all the way
> produces regression failures under force_parallel_mode. I think I see
> why that's happening but it's not obvious how to me how to adapt
> b73f1b5c29e0ace5a281bc13ce09dea30e1b66de to the v10 code. Do you want
> to have a crack at it or should we just leave this as a master-only
> fix?
>
I think we need to make changes in exec_simple_recheck_plan to make
the behavior similar to HEAD. With the attached patch, all tests
passed with force_parallel_mode.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
