Re: [HACKERS] oversight in parallel aggregate

2016-04-05 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 9:09 PM, David Rowley wrote: > On 5 April 2016 at 11:59, Robert Haas wrote: >> One of my EDB colleagues, while in the process of refactoring some >> unrelated Advanced Server code, discovered that (1) there's no way to >> mark an aggregate as anything other than parallel-un

Re: [HACKERS] oversight in parallel aggregate

2016-04-05 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:26 PM, David Rowley wrote: > Does this need to check the parallel flags on the transfn or serialfn? > these'll be executed on the worker process. Possibly we also need the > combinefn/deserialfn/finalfn to be checked too as I see that we do > generate_gather_paths() from

Re: [HACKERS] oversight in parallel aggregate

2016-04-04 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> One of my EDB colleagues, while in the process of refactoring some >> unrelated Advanced Server code, discovered that (1) there's no way to >> mark an aggregate as anything other than parallel-unsafe but (2) it >> doesn't m

Re: [HACKERS] oversight in parallel aggregate

2016-04-04 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > One of my EDB colleagues, while in the process of refactoring some > unrelated Advanced Server code, discovered that (1) there's no way to > mark an aggregate as anything other than parallel-unsafe but (2) it > doesn't matter because has_parallel_hazard ignores Aggrefs anyway

Re: [HACKERS] oversight in parallel aggregate

2016-04-04 Thread David Rowley
On 5 April 2016 at 13:09, David Rowley wrote: > On 5 April 2016 at 11:59, Robert Haas wrote: >> One of my EDB colleagues, while in the process of refactoring some >> unrelated Advanced Server code, discovered that (1) there's no way to >> mark an aggregate as anything other than parallel-unsafe b

Re: [HACKERS] oversight in parallel aggregate

2016-04-04 Thread David Rowley
On 5 April 2016 at 11:59, Robert Haas wrote: > One of my EDB colleagues, while in the process of refactoring some > unrelated Advanced Server code, discovered that (1) there's no way to > mark an aggregate as anything other than parallel-unsafe but (2) it > doesn't matter because has_parallel_haza

[HACKERS] oversight in parallel aggregate

2016-04-04 Thread Robert Haas
One of my EDB colleagues, while in the process of refactoring some unrelated Advanced Server code, discovered that (1) there's no way to mark an aggregate as anything other than parallel-unsafe but (2) it doesn't matter because has_parallel_hazard ignores Aggrefs anyway. These mistakes cancel each