public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matheus Alcantara <[email protected]>
To: Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]>
Cc: Alexander Pyhalov <[email protected]>
Cc: Pgsql Hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Asynchronous MergeAppend
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2026 10:52:14 -0300
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPpHfdssDymMVohXw5XwdPoJ9UvSv1iN2zRcmsEhhfXXks01Zg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAFY6G8d3Yvxa_kRQA24BsJhwqfmSCv1ujiv_7b6g5isf-ZTs_Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAPpHfdu+3Eud0CBpdFT+osWiT=e=zOQUtBsx8Z5okKrqhgVAJg@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAPpHfdsO8zYpDW==D6T5N0cJ+AzK7a_OyXJoYU1kFi=xZFTLuQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAPpHfdssDymMVohXw5XwdPoJ9UvSv1iN2zRcmsEhhfXXks01Zg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon Apr 6, 2026 at 9:19 PM -03, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
>> Minor comment on 0005:
>>
>> +static void
>> +ExecMergeAppendAsyncGetNext(MergeAppendState *node, int mplan)
>> +{
>> +       /*
>> +        * All initial async requests were fired by ExecAppendBaseAsyncBegin.
>>
>> Wondering if we should reference ExecMergeAppendAsyncBegin() instead of
>> ExecAppendBaseAsyncBegin() since this is on nodeMergeAppend, what do you
>> think?
>
> Technically current comment is correct, because async requests are
> essetially fired by ExecAppendBaseAsyncBegin().  But yes, since we're
> on nodeMergeAppend, it would be less confusing to mention
> ExecMergeAppendAsyncBegin().  Fixed.
>

Thanks for the updated version.

I did another round of review and testing and it looks good to me, I did
not find any issue or strange behaviour.

With the refactor the async support for MergeAppend is not too
complicated. My main concern on this patch series is about the refactor
itself, if we are missing something or changing some behaviour without
notice, however as the  async/sync Append execution is also using the
refactored code and we have a good code coveraged I fell a bit confident
that we are right here.

--
Matheus Alcantara
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com





view thread (33+ messages)  latest in thread

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: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Asynchronous MergeAppend
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox