On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 11:46 PM Greg Nancarrow <gregn4...@gmail.com> wrote: > I personally think "(b) provide an option to the user to specify > whether inserts can be parallelized on a relation" is the preferable > option. > There seems to be too many issues with the alternative of trying to > determine the parallel-safety of a partitioned table automatically. > I think (b) is the simplest and most consistent approach, working the > same way for all table types, and without the overhead of (a). > Also, I don't think (b) is difficult for the user. At worst, the user > can use the provided utility-functions at development-time to verify > the intended declared table parallel-safety. > I can't really see some mixture of (a) and (b) being acceptable.
Yeah, I'd like to have it be automatic, but I don't have a clear idea how to make that work nicely. It's possible somebody (Tom?) can suggest something that I'm overlooking, though. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
