Re: [HACKERS] asynchronous execution

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Corey Huinker
Тема Re: [HACKERS] asynchronous execution
Дата
Msg-id CADkLM=cBZEX9L9HnhJYrtfiAN5Ebdu=xbvM_poWVGBR7yN3gVw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] asynchronous execution  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] asynchronous execution  (Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Corey Huinker <corey.huinker@gmail.com> writes:
> I reworked the test such that all of the foreign tables inherit from the
> same parent table, and if you query that you do get async execution. But It
> doesn't work when just stringing together those foreign tables with UNION
> ALLs.

> I don't know how to proceed with this review if that was a goal of the
> patch.

Whether it was a goal or not, I'd say there is something either broken
or incorrectly implemented if you don't see that.  The planner (and
therefore also the executor) generally treats inheritance the same as
simple UNION ALL.  If that's not the case here, I'd want to know why.

                        regards, tom lane

Updated commitfest entry to "Returned With Feedback".




В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless)
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Size vs size_t