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>, 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: | 2016-04-26 15:34:49 |
Message-ID: | 8309.1461684889@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 Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> I think the word "degree" is largely seen as a bad idea: it would become
>> a somewhat better idea only if we change how it works so that it matches
>> what other DBMSs do, but you oppose that. Hence my proposal to get rid
>> of that word in the UI.
> Well I agree with that up to a point, but I think ALTER TABLE foo SET
> (parallelism = 4) is not a model of clarity. "parallelism" or
> "parallel" is not obviously an integer quality. I guess we could
> s/parallel_degree/parallel_workers/g. I find that terminology less
> elegant than "parallel degree", but I can live with it.
Shouldn't it be "max_parallel_workers", at least in some contexts?
Otherwise, I'd read it as a promise that exactly that many workers
will be used.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-04-26 15:36:46 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add trigonometric functions that work in degrees. |
Previous Message | Christoph Berg | 2016-04-26 15:32:35 | Re: Getting Citus into (Debian) PGDG |