Re: [HACKERS] Parallel bitmap heap scan - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dilip Kumar
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Parallel bitmap heap scan
Date
Msg-id CAFiTN-uxwdBOxmykAMbwTOrxQaHrYRKP80=1xf98VBPOKzwyHQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Parallel bitmap heap scan  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
> Other the another option is, that we can always make caller to provide
> an allocator. But this way every new user for simple hash need to take
> care of having allocator.
>
> What is your opinion?

Attached is the new version of the patch which implements it the way I
described.

>
>
>>This also needs docs, including a warning that just
>> using an allocator in shared memory does *NOT* allow the hash table to be
>> used in shared memory in the general case.
>
> Make sense.
Added the Warning.

I have also fixed some bug in parallel bitmap heap scan
(path.parallel_workers was not initialised before calling
cost_bitmap_heap_scan in some cases, so it was taking the
uninitialized value). Patch attached.

-- 
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
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

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Potential data loss of 2PC files
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Commit fest 2017-01 will begin soon!