From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Simplify plpgsql's check for simple expressions.
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 14:34:58 -0400
Message-ID: <23425.1502822098@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1dhehy-00034e-8N@gemulon.postgresql.org>
References: <E1dhehy-00034e-8N@gemulon.postgresql.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> Simplify plpgsql's check for simple expressions.
> ...
> https://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/00418c61244138bd8ac2de58076a1d0dd4f539f3
The buildfarm members that are running force_parallel_mode = regress
are not happy with this. Apparently, even a trivial SELECT <expression>
can be turned into a Gather plan if force_parallel_mode says so.
I assume (haven't looked) that I could hack the plpgsql code to prevent
generating a parallel plan when it's decided the command is a simple
SELECT. But I wonder whether that's the right place to fix it. Does
it ever make sense to parallelize a plan that can't possibly benefit?
IOW I am not sure that we should carry force_parallel_mode this far.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Simplify plpgsql's check for simple expressions.
In-Reply-To: <23425.1502822098@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox