From a8474d863074cc97f49702b4cff4c69613f30b96 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Amit Kapila Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2020 10:52:46 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] Fix typos in parallel query docs. Reported-by: Jon Jensen Author: Jon Jensen Reviewed-by: Amit Kapila and Robert Haas Backpatch-through: 10 Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/nycvar.YSQ.7.76.1912301807510.9899@ybpnyubfg --- doc/src/sgml/parallel.sgml | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/parallel.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/parallel.sgml index 3e7bfea07c..6c30916655 100644 --- a/doc/src/sgml/parallel.sgml +++ b/doc/src/sgml/parallel.sgml @@ -302,7 +302,7 @@ EXPLAIN SELECT * FROM pgbench_accounts WHERE filler LIKE '%x%'; scan, the cooperating processes take turns reading data from the index. Currently, parallel index scans are supported only for btree indexes. Each process will claim a single index block and will - scan and return all tuples referenced by that block; other process can + scan and return all tuples referenced by that block; other processes can at the same time be returning tuples from a different index block. The results of a parallel btree scan are returned in sorted order within each worker process. @@ -435,7 +435,7 @@ EXPLAIN SELECT * FROM pgbench_accounts WHERE filler LIKE '%x%'; involve appending multiple results sets can therefore achieve coarse-grained parallelism even when efficient partial plans are not available. For example, consider a query against a partitioned table - which can be only be implemented efficiently by using an index that does + which can only be implemented efficiently by using an index that does not support parallel scans. The planner might choose a Parallel Append of regular Index Scan plans; each individual index scan would have to be executed to completion by a single