On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 12:15:08PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm also wondering whether to back-patch such a change. Since we've
> not heard field complaints that match up to this problem, it may be
> that it's unlikely enough that fixing it in HEAD is good enough.
HEAD sounds good enough for to m
The discussion around bug #15525 prompted me to go back and review
our previous go-round with parallelism issues in the ECPG build,
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/26240C1F-5AA0-41D6-B1F1-D336BFD14CEA%40logicalchaos.org
At that time we'd identified several maybe-issues with parallel
ECP
