Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Well, it has subplans, so formally I think it's restricted not unsafe >> --- but the parallel_safe marking on constructed paths/plans is only >> safe/not-safe, not a three-way.
> True, but when parallel_safe it not set, that means it's not > parallel-safe, so either parallel-restricted or parallel-unsafe. But > if parallelModeOK is true, then it had better be parallel-restricted, > not parallel-unsafe. Ah, I see. > So I still don't see what's wrong here, other than that the comment is > evidently not half clear enough. I can get on board with that statement. Can you draft a better wording? 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