On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 3:58 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> IMHO, for a non-partitioned table, we should be default allow the
> parallel safely checking so that users don't have to set it for
> individual tables, OTOH, I don't think that there is any point in
> blocking the syntax for the non-partitioned table, So I think for the
> non-partitioned table if the user hasn't set it we should do automatic
> safety checking and if the user has defined the safety externally then
> we should respect that. And for the partitioned table, we will never
> do the automatic safety checking and we should always respect what the
> user has set.
>
Provided it is possible to distinguish between the default
parallel-safety (unsafe) and that default being explicitly specified
by the user, it should be OK.
In the case of performing the automatic parallel-safety checking and
the table using something that is parallel-unsafe, there will be a
performance degradation compared to the current code (hopefully only
small). That can be avoided by the user explicitly specifying that
it's parallel-unsafe.
Regards,
Greg Nancarrow
Fujitsu Australia
