On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 5:14 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Given that we have only about one month until the feature freeze, I > find that it's realistic to introduce either one parallelism for PG18 > and at least we might want to implement the one first that is more > beneficial and helpful for users. Since we found that parallel phase > III is not very efficient in many cases, I'm thinking that in terms of > PG18 development, we might want to switch focus to parallel phase I, > and then go for phase III if we have time.
Okay, well let me know how I can be helpful. Should I be reviewing a version that is already posted? - Melanie
