Minor comment edits in nodeGather.c
While going through nodeGather.c, I noticed portions of the file header
comment that may have been obsoleted by recent revisions of the relevant
parellelism code. For example, there is a reference to PartialSeqScan node
which did not make it into the tree. Attached fixes it. Also, wondering if
the semantics of Gather node is that of Scan or more generic Plan? That is
to ask whether the following edit makes sense:
* nodeGather.c
- * Support routines for scanning a plan via multiple workers.
+ * Support routines for getting the result from a plan via multiple
+ * workers.
*Thanks,
Amit
Attachments:
nodegather-comment-fix.patchtext/x-diff; name=nodegather-comment-fix.patchDownload
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeGather.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeGather.c
index b6e82d1..8c6d3e3 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeGather.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeGather.c
@@ -1,7 +1,8 @@
/*-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*
* nodeGather.c
- * Support routines for scanning a plan via multiple workers.
+ * Support routines for getting the result from a plan via multiple
+ * workers.
*
* Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2015, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
* Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California
@@ -11,7 +12,8 @@
* or have not started up yet. It then merges all of the results it produces
* and the results from the workers into a single output stream. Therefore,
* it will normally be used with a plan where running multiple copies of the
- * same plan does not produce duplicate output, such as PartialSeqScan.
+ * same plan does not produce duplicate output, such as parallel-aware
+ * SeqScan.
*
* Alternatively, a Gather node can be configured to use just one worker
* and the single-copy flag can be set. In this case, the Gather node will
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 1:06 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
While going through nodeGather.c, I noticed portions of the file header
comment that may have been obsoleted by recent revisions of the relevant
parellelism code. For example, there is a reference to PartialSeqScan node
which did not make it into the tree. Attached fixes it. Also, wondering if
the semantics of Gather node is that of Scan or more generic Plan? That is
to ask whether the following edit makes sense:* nodeGather.c - * Support routines for scanning a plan via multiple workers. + * Support routines for getting the result from a plan via multiple + * workers. *
Well I think "scanning a plan" is clear enough even if it's
technically a Scan. But I agree the second change is needed.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 1:06 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:While going through nodeGather.c, I noticed portions of the file header
comment that may have been obsoleted by recent revisions of the relevant
parellelism code. For example, there is a reference to PartialSeqScan node
which did not make it into the tree. Attached fixes it. Also, wondering if
the semantics of Gather node is that of Scan or more generic Plan? That is
to ask whether the following edit makes sense:* nodeGather.c - * Support routines for scanning a plan via multiple workers. + * Support routines for getting the result from a plan via multiple + * workers. *Well I think "scanning a plan" is clear enough even if it's
technically a Scan. But I agree the second change is needed.
Err, even if it's NOT technically a scan.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On 2015/11/25 11:31, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 1:06 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:While going through nodeGather.c, I noticed portions of the file header
comment that may have been obsoleted by recent revisions of the relevant
parellelism code. For example, there is a reference to PartialSeqScan node
which did not make it into the tree. Attached fixes it. Also, wondering if
the semantics of Gather node is that of Scan or more generic Plan? That is
to ask whether the following edit makes sense:* nodeGather.c - * Support routines for scanning a plan via multiple workers. + * Support routines for getting the result from a plan via multiple + * workers. *Well I think "scanning a plan" is clear enough even if it's
technically a Scan.
Okay, ripped that out in the attached.
Thanks,
Amit
Attachments:
nodegather-comment-fix.patchtext/x-diff; name=nodegather-comment-fix.patchDownload
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeGather.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeGather.c
index b6e82d1..10e2319 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeGather.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeGather.c
@@ -11,7 +11,8 @@
* or have not started up yet. It then merges all of the results it produces
* and the results from the workers into a single output stream. Therefore,
* it will normally be used with a plan where running multiple copies of the
- * same plan does not produce duplicate output, such as PartialSeqScan.
+ * same plan does not produce duplicate output, such as parallel-aware
+ * SeqScan.
*
* Alternatively, a Gather node can be configured to use just one worker
* and the single-copy flag can be set. In this case, the Gather node will
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 9:43 PM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
On 2015/11/25 11:31, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 1:06 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:While going through nodeGather.c, I noticed portions of the file header
comment that may have been obsoleted by recent revisions of the relevant
parellelism code. For example, there is a reference to PartialSeqScan node
which did not make it into the tree. Attached fixes it. Also, wondering if
the semantics of Gather node is that of Scan or more generic Plan? That is
to ask whether the following edit makes sense:* nodeGather.c - * Support routines for scanning a plan via multiple workers. + * Support routines for getting the result from a plan via multiple + * workers. *Well I think "scanning a plan" is clear enough even if it's
technically a Scan.Okay, ripped that out in the attached.
Committed, thanks.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On 2015/12/01 3:06, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 9:43 PM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:On 2015/11/25 11:31, Robert Haas wrote:
Well I think "scanning a plan" is clear enough even if it's
technically a Scan.Okay, ripped that out in the attached.
Committed, thanks.
Thanks!
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers