On Dec 2, 2016, at 5:45 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com> writes:
>>> On 12/2/16 2:34 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> Signs point to "no". It seemed like a good idea to leave some daylight between max_parallel_workers and
max_worker_processes,but evidently this wasn't the way to get there. Or else we should just give up on that thought.
>
>> Could the defaults be scaled based on max_connections, with a max on the
>> default?
>
> Might work. We've had very bad luck with GUC variables with
> interdependent defaults, but maybe the user-visible knob could be a
> percentage of max_connections or something like that.
Seems like overkill. Let's just reduce the values a bit.
...Robert
