Re: Instability in partition_prune test? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Instability in partition_prune test?
Date
Msg-id 4475.1523628300@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Instability in partition_prune test?  (David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Instability in partition_prune test?
List pgsql-hackers
David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> The attached basically adds:
> set max_parallel_workers = 0;

It seems quite silly to be asking for a parallel plan and then insisting
it not run in parallel.

Maybe the right solution is to strip out the loop_count from what's
printed.  We've already done that sort of thing in at least one other
test, using some plpgsql code to "sed" the EXPLAIN output.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Instability in partition_prune test?
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Instability in partition_prune test?