Sorry for the late reply.
> additional complexity and a possible lag of progress updates. So if we
> go with the current approach, I think we need to make sure enough (and
> not too many) hash table entries.
The hash table can be set 4 times the size of
max_worker_processes which should give more than
enough padding.
Note that max_parallel_maintenance_workers
is what should be used, but since it's dynamic, it cannot
be used to determine the size of shared memory.
Regards,
---
Sami Imseih
Amazon Web Services
