Thread: Docs: Move parallel_leader_participation GUC description under relevant category

On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 09:16:49PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> It looks like even though the commit e5253fdc4f that added the
> parallel_leader_participation GUC correctly categorized it as
> RESOURCES_ASYNCHRONOUS parameter in the code, but in the docs it is kept
> under irrelevant section i.e. "Query Planning/Other Planner Options". This
> is reported in the bugs list [1], cc-ed the reporter.
>
> Attaching a small patch that moves the GUC description to the right place.
> Thoughts?

I would keep the discussion on the existing thread rather than spawn a
new one on -hackers for exactly the same problem, so I'll reply there
in a minute.
--
Michael

On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 8:00 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 09:16:49PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > It looks like even though the commit e5253fdc4f that added the
> > parallel_leader_participation GUC correctly categorized it as
> > RESOURCES_ASYNCHRONOUS parameter in the code, but in the docs it is kept
> > under irrelevant section i.e. "Query Planning/Other Planner Options". This
> > is reported in the bugs list [1], cc-ed the reporter.
> >
> > Attaching a small patch that moves the GUC description to the right place.
> > Thoughts?
>
> I would keep the discussion on the existing thread rather than spawn a
> new one on -hackers for exactly the same problem, so I'll reply there
> in a minute.

I thought we might miss the discussion in the hackers list. I'm sorry
for starting a new thread. I'm closing this thread.

With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com