| From: | Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| 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 18:38:30 |
| Message-ID: | 574DDA26.8050104@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
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.
--
--
Josh Berkus
Red Hat OSAS
(any opinions are my own)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh berkus | 2016-05-31 18:45:54 | Re: Logic behind parallel default? WAS: Rename max_parallel_degree? |
| Previous Message | Josh berkus | 2016-05-31 18:37:30 | Re: Rename max_parallel_degree? |