> > > > > So, users need to check count(*) for this to determine
> > > > > parallel-safety? How about if we provide a wrapper function on
> > > > > top of this function or a separate function that returns char to
> > > > > indicate whether it is safe, unsafe, or restricted to perform a
> > > > > DML operation on the table?
> > > >
> > > > Such wrapper function make sense.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the suggestion, and I agree.
> > > I will add another wrapper function and post new version patches soon.
> >
> > Attaching new version patches with the following changes:
> >
> > 0001
> > Add a new function pg_get_max_parallel_hazard('table_name') returns
> > char('s', 'u', 'r') which indicate whether it is safe, unsafe, or
> > restricted to
> perform a DML.
>
> Thanks for the patches. I think we should have the table name as regclass type
> for pg_get_max_parallel_hazard? See, pg_relation_size, pg_table_size,
> pg_filenode_relation and so on.
Thanks for the comment.
I have changed the type to regclass in the latest patchset.
Best regards,
houzj
