Re: Choosing parallel_degree

From: Julien Rouhaud <julien(dot)rouhaud(at)dalibo(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: tushar <tushar(dot)ahuja(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, James Sewell <james(dot)sewell(at)lisasoft(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Paul Ramsey <pramsey(at)cleverelephant(dot)ca>, Andreas Ulbrich <andreas(dot)ulbrich(at)matheversum(dot)de>
Subject: Re: Choosing parallel_degree
Date: 2016-04-13 18:21:38
Message-ID: 570E8E32.6090103@dalibo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 13/04/2016 19:17, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 6:31 PM, Julien Rouhaud
> <julien(dot)rouhaud(at)dalibo(dot)com> wrote:
>> On 11/04/2016 22:53, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>>> On 11/04/2016 17:44, Robert Haas wrote:
>>>> We should probably add the number of workers actually obtained to the
>>>> EXPLAIN ANALYZE output. That's been requested before.
>>>
>>> If it's not too late for 9.6, it would be very great.
>>
>> Just in case I attach a patch to implement it. I'll add it to the next
>> commitfest.
>
> I think we should go with "Workers Planned" and "Workers Launched",
> capitalized exactly that way, and lose "Number Of".
>

Fixed

> I would be inclined to view this as a reasonable 9.6 cleanup of
> parallel query, but other people may wish to construe things more
> strictly than I would.
>

FWIW, I also see it as a reasonable cleanup.

--
Julien Rouhaud
http://dalibo.com - http://dalibo.org

Attachment Content-Type Size
explain_worker_launched_v2.diff text/plain 1.7 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-04-13 18:25:18 Re: Odd system-column handling in postgres_fdw join pushdown patch
Previous Message Andres Freund 2016-04-13 18:20:19 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow Pin/UnpinBuffer to operate in a lockfree manner.