Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Peter Eisentraut >> <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>> Elsewhere in this thread I suggested getting rid of the parallel worker >>> context by default (except for debugging), but if we do want to keep it, >>> then it seems to be a bug that a PL/pgSQL function can just eliminate it.
> This is currently listed as an open item, but it doesn't seem very > actionable to me. The fact that PL/plpgsql chucks the existing > context instead of appending to it is presumably a property of > PL/plpgsql, not parallel query, and changing that seems like it ought > to be out of scope for 9.6. FWIW, I follow all of your reasoning except this. If we believe that the parallel worker context line is useful, then it is a bug that plpgsql suppresses it. If we don't believe it's useful, then we should get rid of it. "Do nothing" is simply not a consistent stance here. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers