Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Rename max_parallel_degree? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAM3SWZQS9idryPMzUZ7UOHgKT-5-qzJAM88BBHhfiae4NrDEmg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Rename max_parallel_degree? (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 7:04 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > OK, I pushed this after re-reviewing it and fixing a number of > oversights. There remains only the task of adding max_parallel_degree > as a system-wide limit (as opposed to max_parallel_degree now > max_parallel_workers_per_gather which is a per-Gather limit), which > I'm going to argue should be a new open item and not necessarily one > that I have to own myself. I would like to take care of it, but I > will not put it ahead of fixing actual defects and I will not promise > to have it done in time for 9.6. I am in favor of having something similar to max_parallel_workers_per_gather for utility statements like CREATE INDEX. That will need a cost model, at least where the DBA isn't explicit about the number of workers to use. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: