Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

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 CAFjFpRfrQ8Hdr0fYnPRVHHgOTQEFt2DbR2weHuU0MTs2oz_ntg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: parallel append vs. simple UNION ALL  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 2:09 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
> <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> 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.
>
> Oops.  Thanks.
>
> I'm going to go ahead and commit 0001 here.  Any more thoughts on the rest?

Nope. I am good with the patchset.

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

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Another oddity in handling of WCO constraints in postgres_fdw
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions