Re: SQL-standard function body - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: SQL-standard function body
Date
Msg-id YG54YggzyPrTFE+e@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SQL-standard function body  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: SQL-standard function body  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 04:22:17PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Buildfarm suggests this has some issues under force_parallel_mode.
> I'm wondering about missed fields in outfuncs/readfuncs, or the like.

The problem looks a bit more fundamental to me, as there seems to be
some confusion with the concept of what should be the query string
when it comes to prosqlbody with a parallel run, as it replaces prosrc
in some cases where the function uses SQL as language.  If the
buildfarm cannot be put back to green, could it be possible to revert
this patch?
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId for pg_catalog.pg_stat_activity view?
Next
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: ModifyTable overheads in generic plans