Re: max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta
Date: 2016-08-16 01:10:12
Message-ID: 3865.1471309812@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> I too prefer to keep it turned off in 9.6 and consider enabling it by
>> default on a future release (10 is probably good). Interested users can
>> carefully test the feature without endangering other unsuspecting users.
>> I agree with the idea of keeping it enabled in master, so that it'll get
>> a modicum of testing there by hackers, too.

> Sounds like that is the consensus. Who's going to implement it?

I believe we're talking about reverting 77cd477c4 (in 9.6 only not
master), correct? It's a little harder than just "git revert" because
of the subsequent max_parallel_degree -> max_parallel_workers_per_gather
name change, but still not exactly rocket science.

Since 77cd477c4 was your commit, I'd sort of expect you to do the
honors, but if you don't want to I can.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-08-16 02:16:08 Re: max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2016-08-16 00:40:14 Re: Patch: initdb: "'" for QUOTE_PATH (non-windows)