Peter Geoghegan <p...@bowt.ie> writes:
> Do you think that it's okay that we rely on the propagation of global
> state to parallel workers on Postgres 13? Don't we need something like
> my fixup commit 49f49def on Postgres 13 as well? At least for the
> EXEC_BACKEND case, I think.
Uh ... *what* propagation of global state to parallel workers? Workers
fork off from the postmaster, not from their leader process.
(I note that morepork is still failing. The other ones didn't report
in yet.)
regards, tom lane
