On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 3:01 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 2:44 PM vignesh C <vignes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Thanks Ashutosh for your comments. > > > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 6:36 PM Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coe...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Vignesh, > > > > > > I've spent some time today looking at your new set of patches and I've > > > some thoughts and queries which I would like to put here: > > > > > > Why are these not part of the shared cstate structure? > > > > > > SerializeString(pcxt, PARALLEL_COPY_KEY_NULL_PRINT, > > > cstate->null_print); > > > SerializeString(pcxt, PARALLEL_COPY_KEY_DELIM, cstate->delim); > > > SerializeString(pcxt, PARALLEL_COPY_KEY_QUOTE, cstate->quote); > > > SerializeString(pcxt, PARALLEL_COPY_KEY_ESCAPE, cstate->escape); > > > > > > > I have used shared_cstate mainly to share the integer & bool data > > types from the leader to worker process. The above data types are of > > char* data type, I will not be able to use it like how I could do it > > for integer type. So I preferred to send these as separate keys to the > > worker. Thoughts? > > > > I think the way you have written will work but if we go with > Ashutosh's proposal it will look elegant and in the future, if we need > to share more strings as part of cstate structure then that would be > easier. You can probably refer to EstimateParamListSpace, > SerializeParamList, and RestoreParamList to see how we can share > different types of data in one key. >
Thanks for the solution Amit, I have fixed this and handled it in the v6 patch shared in my previous mail. Regards, Vignesh EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
