Re: pgsql: Add a new GUC and a reloption to enable inserts in parallel-mode

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Alvaro Herrera
Тема Re: pgsql: Add a new GUC and a reloption to enable inserts in parallel-mode
Дата
Msg-id 20210323202958.GA18316@alvherre.pgsql
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: pgsql: Add a new GUC and a reloption to enable inserts in parallel-mode  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: pgsql: Add a new GUC and a reloption to enable inserts in parallel-mode  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: pgsql: Add a new GUC and a reloption to enable inserts in parallel-mode  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-committers
On 2021-Mar-23, Robert Haas wrote:

> Likewise, the XXX comment you added to max_parallel_hazard_walker
> claims that some of the code introduced there is to compensate for an
> unspecified bug in the rewriter. I'm a bit skeptical that the comment
> is correct, and there's no way to find out because the comment doesn't
> say what the bug supposedly is, but let's just say for the sake of
> argument that it's true. Well, you *could* have fixed the bug, but
> instead you hacked around it, and in a relatively expensive way that
> affects every query with a CTE in it whether it can benefit from this
> patch or not. That's not a responsible way of maintaining the core
> PostgreSQL code.

I think the CTE bug is this one:

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAJcOf-fAdj=nDKMsRhQzndm-O13NY4dL6xGcEvdX5Xvbbi0V7g@mail.gmail.com

while I can't disagree with the overall conclusion that it seems safer
to revert parallel INSERT/SELECT given the number of alleged problems,
it is true that this bug exists, and has gone unfixed.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera       Valdivia, Chile



В списке pgsql-committers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pgsql: Add a new GUC and a reloption to enable inserts in parallel-mode
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pgsql: Add a new GUC and a reloption to enable inserts in parallel-mode