Re: parallel append vs. simple UNION ALL - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Ashutosh Bapat
Subject Re: parallel append vs. simple UNION ALL
Date
Msg-id CAFjFpRcvSdUpK9jcbf+F-wO2Km4h7h_57BfSvkGZXJSdDNzNKA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: parallel append vs. simple UNION ALL  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: parallel append vs. simple UNION ALL  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 1:28 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 0003
>> Probably we want to rename generate_union_path() as generate_union_rel() or
>> generate_union_paths() since the function doesn't return a path anymore.
>> Similarly for generate_nonunion_path().
>
> Good point.  Changed.

It looks like it was not changed in all the places. make falied. I
have fixed all the instances of these two functions in the attached
patchset (only 0003 changes). Please check.

-- 
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Charles Cui
Date:
Subject: Re: GSOC 2018 proposal
Next
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions