Re: [bug?] Missed parallel safety checks, and wrong parallel safety

"tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com" <tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com> writes:
> From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
>> No.  You'd have to be superuser anyway to do that, and we're not in the
>> habit of trying to put training wheels on superusers.

> Understood.  However, we may add the parallel safety member in fmgr_builtins[] in another thread for parallel INSERT
SELECT. I'd appreciate your comment on this if you see any concern. 

[ raised eyebrow... ]  I find it very hard to understand why that would
be necessary, or even a good idea.  Not least because there's no spare
room there; you'd have to incur a substantial enlargement of the
array to add another flag.  But also, that would indeed lock down
the value of the parallel-safety flag, and that seems like a fairly
bad idea.

            regards, tom lane