Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?
От | Josh berkus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Rename max_parallel_degree? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 575051AF.2090101@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Rename max_parallel_degree? (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 06/02/2016 04:58 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > Well, I think we could drop node, if you like. I think parallel > wouldn't be good to drop, though, because it sounds like we want a > global limit on parallel workers also, and that can't be just > max_workers. So I think we should keep parallel in there for all of > them, and have max_parallel_workers and > max_parallel_workers_per_gather(_node). The reloption and the Path > struct field can be parallel_workers rather than parallel_degree. So does that mean we'll rename it if you manage to implement a parameter which controls the number of workers for the whole statement? -- -- Josh Berkus Red Hat OSAS (any opinions are my own)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: