Re: Parallel INSERT SELECT take 2
От | Bharath Rupireddy |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Parallel INSERT SELECT take 2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CALj2ACWXQMS_1vdjeMBXO819HjqHn=g8M7A8cXhUJ4tknumwqw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: Parallel INSERT SELECT take 2 ("houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>) |
Ответы |
RE: Parallel INSERT SELECT take 2
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 6:11 PM houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > > > So, users need to check count(*) for this to determine > > > > parallel-safety? How about if we provide a wrapper function on top > > > > of this function or a separate function that returns char to > > > > indicate whether it is safe, unsafe, or restricted to perform a DML > > > > operation on the table? > > > > > > Such wrapper function make sense. > > > > Thanks for the suggestion, and I agree. > > I will add another wrapper function and post new version patches soon. > > Attaching new version patches with the following changes: > > 0001 > Add a new function pg_get_max_parallel_hazard('table_name') returns char('s', 'u', 'r') > which indicate whether it is safe, unsafe, or restricted to perform a DML. Thanks for the patches. I think we should have the table name as regclass type for pg_get_max_parallel_hazard? See, pg_relation_size, pg_table_size, pg_filenode_relation and so on. With Regards, Bharath Rupireddy. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: