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

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoaobdYrJ1kSA4zCY_Cwk3AmTUd3Gj44Nb=aEGUGdeJ_Pw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> 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.

Thank you.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: old_snapshot_threshold allows heap:toast disagreement
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Why we lost Uber as a user