Re: [HACKERS] Gather Merge

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Thomas Munro
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Gather Merge
Дата
Msg-id CAEepm=1FTRQtgP66xGwgztkSWtazBQZvJCzd1gLLj27zJ+U+BQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Gather Merge  (Rushabh Lathia <rushabh.lathia@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] Gather Merge  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Re: [HACKERS] Gather Merge  (Rushabh Lathia <rushabh.lathia@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 2:32 AM, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh.lathia@gmail.com> wrote:
> Please find attached latest patch.

The latest patch still applies (with some fuzz), builds and the
regression tests pass.

I see that Robert made a number of changes and posted a v6 along with
some numbers which he described as lacklustre, but then fixed a row
estimate problem which was discouraging parallel joins (commit
0c2070ce).  Rushabh posted a v7 and test results which look good.  As
far as I can see there are no outstanding issues or unhandled review
feedback.  I've had a fresh read through of the latest version and
have no further comments myself.

I've set this to ready-for-committer now.  If I've misunderstood and
there are still unresolved issues from that earlier email exchange or
someone else wants to post a review or objection, then of course
please feel free to set it back.

BTW  There is no regression test supplied.  I see that commit 5262f7a4
adding parallel index scans put simple explain output in
"select_parallel" to demonstrate the new kind of plan being created;
perhaps this patch should do the same?  I know it wouldn't really test
much of the code but it's at least something.  Perhaps you could post
a new version with that?

-- 
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Alexander Korotkov
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Should we cacheline align PGXACT?
Следующее
От: Amit Kapila
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Gather Merge