On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 3:58 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > IMHO, for a non-partitioned table, we should be default allow the > parallel safely checking so that users don't have to set it for > individual tables, OTOH, I don't think that there is any point in > blocking the syntax for the non-partitioned table, So I think for the > non-partitioned table if the user hasn't set it we should do automatic > safety checking and if the user has defined the safety externally then > we should respect that. And for the partitioned table, we will never > do the automatic safety checking and we should always respect what the > user has set. >
Provided it is possible to distinguish between the default parallel-safety (unsafe) and that default being explicitly specified by the user, it should be OK. In the case of performing the automatic parallel-safety checking and the table using something that is parallel-unsafe, there will be a performance degradation compared to the current code (hopefully only small). That can be avoided by the user explicitly specifying that it's parallel-unsafe. Regards, Greg Nancarrow Fujitsu Australia
