Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered
Date
Msg-id 194d6594-40da-7202-ff94-9003138c54e1@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 6/19/16 10:00 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Independent of that, it would help testing things like this if we allowed
>> > setting max_worker_processes to 0, instead of the current minimum 1.  If
>> > there a reason for the minimum of 1?
> I believe that's pure brain fade on my part.  I think the minimum should be 0.

Fixed.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_size_pretty, SHOW, and spaces
Next
From: John Harvey
Date:
Subject: Re: MSVC pl-perl error message is not verbose enough