On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 5:17 AM, David Rowley <david.row...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 14 February 2017 at 21:25, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: >> + Aggregate</> stage. For such cases there is clearly going to be no >> + performance benefit to using parallel aggregation. >> >> A comma is required after "For such cases" > > Added > >>> The query planner takes >>> + this into account during the planning process and will choose how to >>> + perform the aggregation accordingly. >> >> This part of the sentence sounds unclear. It doesn't clearly >> indicate that planner won't choose a parallel plan in such cases. > > I thought that was obvious enough giving that I'd just mentioned that > there's clearly no benefit, however I've changed things to make that a > bit more explicit. > > Thanks for reviewing this. > > Updated patch attached.
Committed and back-patched to 9.6. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
