Re: Parallel query behaving different with custom GUCs - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Parallel query behaving different with custom GUCs
Date
Msg-id ZUxZhZfO4ADfi8D8@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Parallel query behaving different with custom GUCs  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 09:21:56AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I'm also alert to my own possible bias. Perhaps since I designed this
> mechanism, I'm more prone to viewing its deficiencies as minor than a
> neutral observer would be. So if anyone is sitting there reading this
> and thinking "wow, I can't believe Robert doesn't think it's important
> to fix this," feel free to write back and say so.

Fun.  Agreed that this is a bug, and that the consequences are of
null for most users.  And it took 7 years to find that.

If I may ask, is there an impact with functions that include SET
clauses with custom parameters that are parallel safe?  Saying that,
if the fix is simple, I see no reason not to do something about it,
even if that's HEAD-only.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Doubled test for SET statements in pg_stat_statements tests
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: A recent message added to pg_upgade