Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Append implementation

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Adrien Nayrat <adrien(dot)nayrat(at)anayrat(dot)info>, Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Append implementation
Date: 2018-05-08 13:15:05
Message-ID: CA+TgmobFyhhWUcLYOXBwAdEwtgyLG4G-dqx=p-ibhrkFFMtQDA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: Postg스포츠 토토 결과SQL

On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 12:10 AM, Thomas Munro
<thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> It's not a scan, it's not a join and it's not an aggregation so I
> think it needs to be in a new <sect2> as the same level as those
> others. It's a different kind of thing.

I'm a little skeptical about that idea because I'm not sure it's
really in the same category as far as importance is concerned, but I
don't have a better idea. Here's a patch. I'm worried this is too
much technical jargon, but I don't know how to explain it any more
simply.

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

Attachment Content-Type Size
parallel-append-doc.patch application/octet-stream 2.8 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chapman Flack 2018-05-08 13:19:31 Re: MAP syntax for arrays
Previous Message Ildar Musin 2018-05-08 12:57:14 Re: MAP syntax for arrays