Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1LjcXX2K0zS5sMTii+VOK7y1eGusHs7DKDkSQ17K3uL6Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 4:34 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This is required to prohibit generating gather path for top rel in
>> case of inheritence (Append node) at this place (we want to generate
>> it later when scan/join target is available).
>
> OK, but why don't we want to generate it later when there isn't
> inheritance involved?
>

We do want to generate it later when there isn't inheritance involved,
but only if there is a single rel involved (simple_rel_array_size
<=2).  The rule is something like this, we will generate the gather
paths at this stage only if there are more than two rels involved and
there isn't inheritance involved.


-- 
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

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Li Song
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] need info about extensibility in other databases
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions