From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Rename max_parallel_degree? |
Date: | 2016-05-31 18:46:47 |
Message-ID: | 22988.1464720407@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> On 05/31/2016 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>>> One more consistency question: what's the effect of running out of
>>> max_parallel_workers?
>> ITYM max_worker_processes (ie, the cluster-wide pool size)?
> Yes. Sorry for contributing to the confusion. Too many
> similar-sounding parameter names.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing while preparing my docs patch.
At the risk of opening another can of worms, what about renaming
max_worker_processes as well? It would be a good thing if that
had "cluster" in it somewhere, or something that indicates it's a
system-wide value not a per-session value. "max_workers_per_cluster"
would answer, though I'm not in love with it particularly.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2016-05-31 18:51:58 | Re: Rename max_parallel_degree? |
Previous Message | Josh berkus | 2016-05-31 18:45:54 | Re: Logic behind parallel default? WAS: Rename max_parallel_degree? |