Re: Rename max_parallel_degree? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwY0p3jHNk-ibiOQJXNh90Eo8WbQiywM0PDfqT60XJ2Q6g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> Well, I think we could drop node, if you like.  I think parallel
> wouldn't be good to drop, though, because it sounds like we want a
> global limit on parallel workers also, and that can't be just
> max_workers.  So I think we should keep parallel in there for all of
> them, and have max_parallel_workers and
> max_parallel_workers_per_gather(_node).  The reloption and the Path
> struct field can be parallel_workers rather than parallel_degree.

WFM.

​+1​
 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: pg9.6 segfault using simple query (related to use fk for join estimates)