Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Dec 2, 2016, at 5:45 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Might work. We've had very bad luck with GUC variables with
>> interdependent defaults, but maybe the user-visible knob could be a
>> percentage of max_connections or something like that.
> Seems like overkill. Let's just reduce the values a bit.
Agreed. How about max_worker_processes = 8 as before, with
max_parallel_workers of maybe 6? Or just set them both to 8.
I'm not sure that the out-of-the-box configuration needs to
leave backend slots locked down for non-parallel worker processes.
Any such process would require manual configuration anyway no?
regards, tom lane
