On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 9:48 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 11:37 PM Rafia Sabih wrote:
> > ...
> > Also, I noticed that the worker details are displayed for sort node even
> > without verbose, but for scans it is only with verbose. Am I missing
> > something or there is somet
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 2:39 AM David Steele wrote:
> On 1/26/20 7:03 PM, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > Fair point. I will look into that.
>
> Are you still planning on looking at this patch for PG13?
>
> Based on the current state (002 abandoned, 001 needs total rework) I'd
> say it should just be Ret
Hi Thomas,
On 1/26/20 7:03 PM, Thomas Munro wrote:
Fair point. I will look into that.
Are you still planning on looking at this patch for PG13?
Based on the current state (002 abandoned, 001 needs total rework) I'd
say it should just be Returned with Feedback or Closed for now.
Regards,
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 11:49 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> I've occasionally wondered whether we'd be better off presenting
> this info as if the leader were "worker 0" and then the N workers
> are workers 1 to N. I've not worked out the implications of that
> in any detail though. It's fairly easy to s
Thomas Munro writes:
> I think I'm going to abandon 0002 for now, because that stuff is being
> refactored independently over here, so rebasing would be futile:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAOtHd0AvAA8CLB9Xz0wnxu1U%3DzJCKrr1r4QwwXi_kcQsHDVU%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com
Yeah, your 0002 ne
On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 3:39 PM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
> So, I think from a code review perspective the code in the patches
> LGTM.
> As for the EXPLAIN ANALYZE tests--I don't see that many of them in
> regress, so maybe that's because they aren't normally very useful. In
> this case, it would o
So, I think from a code review perspective the code in the patches
LGTM.
As for the EXPLAIN ANALYZE tests--I don't see that many of them in
regress, so maybe that's because they aren't normally very useful. In
this case, it would only be to protect against regressions in printing
the leader instru
Both patches aren't applying cleanly anymore.
The first patch in the set applied cleanly for me before b925a00f4ef65
It mostly seems like the default settings for the patch program were
my problem, but, since I noticed that the patch tester bot was failing
to apply it also, I thought I would sugge
On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 11:37 PM Rafia Sabih wrote:
> I was reviewing this patch and here are a few comments,
Hi Rafia,
Thanks!
> +static void
> +ExplainNodePerProcess(ExplainState *es, bool *opened_group,
> + int worker_number, Instrumentation *instrument)
> +{
>
> A small description about th
On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 at 00:30, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 12:11 PM Thomas Munro
> wrote:
> > I guess I thought of that as a debugging feature and took it out
> > because it was too verbose, but maybe it just needs to be controlled
> > by the VERBOSE switch. Do you think we shoul
On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 12:11 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> I guess I thought of that as a debugging feature and took it out
> because it was too verbose, but maybe it just needs to be controlled
> by the VERBOSE switch. Do you think we should put that back?
By which I mean: would you like to send a p
On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 5:24 AM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 12:30 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
>> Of course there are some more things that could be reported in a
>> similar way eventually, such as filter counters and hash join details.
>
> This made me think about other explain w
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 10:39:04AM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 9:24 AM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
Checked out the patches a bit and noticed that the tuplesort
instrumentation uses spaceUsed and I saw this comment in
tuplesort_get_stats()
might it be worth trying out th
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 9:24 AM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
> Checked out the patches a bit and noticed that the tuplesort
> instrumentation uses spaceUsed and I saw this comment in
> tuplesort_get_stats()
> might it be worth trying out the memory accounting API
> 5dd7fc1519461548eebf26c33eac6878ea3e
On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 12:30 AM Thomas Munro
wrote:
>
> While working on some slides explaining EXPLAIN, I couldn't resist the
> urge to add the missing $SUBJECT. The attached 0001 patch gives the
> following:
>
> Gather ... time=0.146..33.077 rows=1 loops=1)
> Workers Planned: 2
> Workers
15 matches
Mail list logo
