Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Index Scans

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:11 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here second part of the comment (but have not yet advanced ..) seems
> to be slightly misleading because this state has nothing to do with
> the advancement of scan keys.
>
> I have not changed this because I am not sure what you have in mind.

OK, I rewrote that to be (hopefully) more clear.

> I have verified all your changes and they look good to me.

Cool.  Committed.  I also changed the wait event to be BtreePage in
the docs + pg_stat_activity, and moved it into alphabetical order in
the switch and the enum.

>> I can't easily test this because your second patch doesn't apply,
>
> I have tried and it works for me on latest code except for one test
> output file which could have been excluded.  I wonder whether you are
> first applying the GUC related patch [1] before applying the optimizer
> support related patch.  In anycase, to avoid confusion I am attaching
> all the three patches with this e-mail.

Oh, duh.  I forgot about the prerequisite patch.  Sorry.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company