Re: [PATCH] force_parallel_mode and GUC categories - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [PATCH] force_parallel_mode and GUC categories
Date
Msg-id 2746080.1618206052@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to [PATCH] force_parallel_mode and GUC categories  (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
> However, I'd like to think that we can do better than what's proposed
> in the patch.  There are a couple of things to consider here:
> - Should the parameter be renamed to reflect that it should only be
> used for testing purposes?

-1 to that part, because it would break a bunch of buildfarm animals'
configurations.  I doubt that any gain in clarity would be worth it.

> - Should we make more general the description of the developer options
> in the docs?

Perhaps ... what did you have in mind?

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bharath Rupireddy
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] force_parallel_mode and GUC categories
Next
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Identify LWLocks in tracepoints