On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 7:36 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 1:05 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Right and seeing that I have prepared the patch (posted above [1])
>> which fixes it such that it will resemble the non-parallel case.
>
> Long story short, I like the patch.
LGTM. There might be an argument for clearing the instrumentation
every time on the basis that you might finish up keeping data from a
non-final loop when a worker opted not to do anything in the final
loop, but I'm not going to make that argument because I don't think it
matters. The patch makes the tests in
test-hash-join-rescan-instr-v1.patch pass (from my previous message).
Please also consider that test patch for commit.
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
