Re: [HACKERS] Accidentally parallel unsafe functions

2016-05-04 Thread Andreas Karlsson
On 05/03/2016 08:45 PM, Robert Haas wrote: Committed all of this except for the bit about pg_start_backup, for which I committed a separate fix. Thanks, and really good that you spotted the pg_start_backup() issue. Andreas -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org

Re: [HACKERS] Accidentally parallel unsafe functions

2016-05-03 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 6:06 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: > I am currently looking into adding the correct parallel options to all > functions in the extensions and I noticed that some built-in functions seems > to have been marked as unsafe by accident. The main culprit is > system_views.sql which

Re: [HACKERS] Accidentally parallel unsafe functions

2016-05-02 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 6:06 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: > I am currently looking into adding the correct parallel options to all > functions in the extensions and I noticed that some built-in functions seems > to have been marked as unsafe by accident. The main culprit is > system_views.sql which

Re: [HACKERS] Accidentally parallel unsafe functions

2016-04-29 Thread Andreas Karlsson
On 04/30/2016 01:19 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Alvaro Herrera writes: Surely CREATE OR REPLACE should keep whatever the flag was, rather than ovewrite it with a bogus value if not specified? In other words IMO the CREATE OR REPLACE code needs changing, not system_views.sql. Absolutely not! The def

Re: [HACKERS] Accidentally parallel unsafe functions

2016-04-29 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera writes: > > Andreas Karlsson wrote: > >> I am currently looking into adding the correct parallel options to all > >> functions in the extensions and I noticed that some built-in functions > seems > >> to have been marked as unsafe

Re: [HACKERS] Accidentally parallel unsafe functions

2016-04-29 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera writes: > Andreas Karlsson wrote: >> I am currently looking into adding the correct parallel options to all >> functions in the extensions and I noticed that some built-in functions seems >> to have been marked as unsafe by accident. The main culprit is >> system_views.sql which red

Re: [HACKERS] Accidentally parallel unsafe functions

2016-04-29 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Andreas Karlsson wrote: > Hi, > > I am currently looking into adding the correct parallel options to all > functions in the extensions and I noticed that some built-in functions seems > to have been marked as unsafe by accident. The main culprit is > system_views.sql which redefines these function

[HACKERS] Accidentally parallel unsafe functions

2016-04-29 Thread Andreas Karlsson
Hi, I am currently looking into adding the correct parallel options to all functions in the extensions and I noticed that some built-in functions seems to have been marked as unsafe by accident. The main culprit is system_views.sql which redefines these functions and removes the parallel safe