Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> I think we should just go with max_parallel_workers for a limit on
> total parallel workers within max_work_processes, and
> max_parallel_workers_per_gather for a per-Gather limit. It's slightly
> annoying that we may end up renaming the latter GUC, but not as
> annoying as spending another three weeks debating this and missing
> beta2.
+1. I'm not as convinced as you are that we'll replace the GUC later,
but in any case this is an accurate description of the current
semantics. And I'm really *not* in favor of fudging the name with
the intent of changing the GUC's semantics later --- that would fail
all sorts of compatibility expectations.
regards, tom lane
