pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
To: David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Parallel Aggregates for string_agg and array_agg
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 15:00:34 +0200
Message-ID: <13e3fd13-8152-72be-4e3c-8095e6ec0995@2ndquadrant.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKJS1f95uF3h0PdMj-zqnTcJXnF68bT4nUKgiXtAdEz44W5HWg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKJS1f8cB3cc5AK=wPvByhU_jKkgd81iRt2kE6cru8uxx2HCuA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKJS1f8LV7AT=AAhdYGKtGrGkSkEgO6C_SW2Ztz1sR3encisqw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1b6ee15c-c218-761e-0120-c1ed438e2db2@2ndquadrant.com>
	<657be73a-a21d-0ae1-5c62-870afbdfddd4@2ndquadrant.com>
	<CAKJS1f-bKAD+s-CJetRQPjmrR-gF-kfvwfzhQm-A0PA-nsr1xw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20180326022647.GL24540@tamriel.snowman.net>
	<CAKJS1f-axkksX3XzduLJuTL=o8CSwf1NaQYO6=iHSXR_B3pCKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20180326132009.GN24540@tamriel.snowman.net>
	<CAKJS1f8JVpUUkYP2c+RyVRdpS1dnjB_DA5fbcDSL3qfMRqc81Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<6538.1522096067@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<25812.1522108164@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CAKJS1f87rFqL0=ksfs+3mmQvg_R0RRGEXyayxHkwYnFqeKpngQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKJS1f9oTWG4oc7B2WfDhT11KhxeV1miLQ+PzB6hY=iJeHM28A@mail.gmail.com>
	<19216.1522207699@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<18741.1522245278@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<1ffa699d-ff84-4c21-10cb-4d8b36017bab@2ndquadrant.com>
	<CAKJS1f95uF3h0PdMj-zqnTcJXnF68bT4nUKgiXtAdEz44W5HWg@mail.gmail.com>



On 03/29/2018 05:49 AM, David Rowley wrote:
> On 29 March 2018 at 03:05, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> On 03/28/2018 03:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I had in mind to look at exprType() of the argument.
>>
>> Right, I'm fine with that.
> 
> Attached is v9, which is based on Tom's v8 but includes the new tests
> and I think the required fix to disable use of the serial/deserial
> function for array_agg().
> 

I have only looked at the diff, but it seems fine to me (in the sense
that it's doing the right checks to disable parallelism only when really
needed).

FWIW I wonder if we might simply fallback to input/output functions when
the send/receive functions are not available. Not sure it's worth it.

regards

-- 
Tomas Vondra                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services




view thread (77+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <13e3fd13-8152-72be-4e3c-8095e6ec0995@2ndquadrant.com>
Permalink:  ../13e3fd13-8152-72be-4e3c-8095e6ec0995@2ndquadrant.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/13e3fd13-8152-72be-4e3c-8095e6ec0995@2ndquadrant.com

 · 

reply
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-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com, david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, sfrost@snowman.net, andres@anarazel.de
  Subject: Re: Parallel Aggregates for string_agg and array_agg
  In-Reply-To: <13e3fd13-8152-72be-4e3c-8095e6ec0995@2ndquadrant.com>

* 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