Re: Small fix to postgresql.conf.sample's comment on max_parallel_workers

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Small fix to postgresql.conf.sample's comment on max_parallel_workers
Date: 2017-03-07 12:42:59
Message-ID: CAA4eK1L5UtH1DMQVmGW4t0jfeBTexjyi=wSW2+3-kOKjBFArzg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 8:02 AM, David Rowley
<david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 7 March 2017 at 15:21, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> +1. How about changing the description of
>> max_parallel_workers_per_gather to "taken from max_worker_processes,
>> limited by max_parallel_workers"?
>
> Thanks for looking.
>
> Seems more accurate to say that it's "taken from
> max_parallel_workers", maybe.
>

I thought of saying similar to what we have in docs, however the way
you have written works for me.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2017-03-07 12:46:22 Re: BRIN de-summarize ranges
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2017-03-07 12:36:51 Re: Need a builtin way to run all tests faster manner