On 11/12/24 15:05, Michael Banck wrote:
> I was wondering about the weird new column name workers_to_launch when I
> read the commit message - AFAICT this has been an internal term so far,
> and this is the first time we expose it to users?
>
> I personally find (parallel_)workers_planned/launched clearer from a
> user perspective, was it discussed that we need to follow the internal
> terms here? If so, I missed that discussion in this thread (and the
> other thread that lead to cf54a2c00).
>
>
> Michael
I initiallly called it like that but changed it to mirror the column
name added in pg_stat_statements for coherence sake. I prefer "planned"
but english is clearly not my strong suit and I assumed it meant that
the number of worker planned could change before execution. I just
checked in parallel.c and I don't think it's the case, could it be done
elsewhere ?
--
Benoit Lobréau
Consultant
http://dalibo.com
