| From: | Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Baji Shaik <baji(dot)pgdev(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Sami Imseih <samimseih(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Doc fix for autovacuum_max_parallel_workers |
| Date: | 2026-10-16 03:10:13 |
| Message-ID: | 418BC8B6-3998-4DF1-B512-0730F7394090@gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On Oct 16, 2026, at 08:22, Baji Shaik <baji(dot)pgdev(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2026 at 6:34 PM Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2026 at 7:01 AM Baji Shaik <baji(dot)pgdev(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> + line; but the setting can be overridden for individual tables by
>
> "overridden" should be "reduced" here? IIUC, this GUC remains an upper limit
> even when the table storage parameter is set, so the table parameter can
> lower the limit but cannot raise it. Both autovacuum_freeze_max_age and
> autovacuum_multixact_freeze_max_age seem to use "reduced" for the same
> reason.
>
> That's a good point. Thank you for the review and correction. v4 attached.
>
> Thanks,
> Baji Shaik.
> <v4-0001-doc-say-where-autovacuum_max_parallel_workers-can.patch>
V4 looks good to me. “Reduced” accurately describes the implementation: parallel_vacuum_compute_workers() caps the table’s requested worker count at autovacuum_max_parallel_workers.
Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | shihao zhong | 2026-10-16 03:11:13 | Re: Parallel TID Range Scan returns wrong results on rescan |
| Previous Message | shihao zhong | 2026-10-16 03:05:06 | Re: [PG19] pg_dump --statistics restores extended statistics by attribute number |