Re: Rename max_parallel_degree? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZS6SWHZH_9g8cTkXj_H_XWpCo_qzLh7rnek2CJS9FEYkg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I am in favor of having something similar to
>> max_parallel_workers_per_gather for utility statements like CREATE
>> INDEX. That will need a cost model, at least where the DBA isn't
>> explicit about the number of workers to use.
>
> We may well need that, but I think it should be discussed in
> conjunction with the patches that add parallelism for those utility
> statements, rather than discussing it on a thread for a 9.6 open item.

Of course.

I don't think it needs to be scoped to utility statements. It's just
clear that it's not appropriate to use max_parallel_workers_per_gather
within utility statements, even though something like that will be
needed.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel safety tagging of extension functions
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?