Re: [HACKERS] A GUC to prevent leader processes from running subplans?

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] A GUC to prevent leader processes from running subplans?
Date: 2017-11-15 13:28:34
Message-ID: CA+Tgmoa=AxuLKo2f1AKwLmvFoo3rr3j+SYHaJ5GVyx1PhhOJ0Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 12:28 AM, Thomas Munro
<thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Thanks. You're right. Rebased and updated to describe what "off" does.

Committed. I noticed that you didn't add the new GUC to
postgresql.conf.sample, so I did that. But then I thought it didn't
really belong in the section you put it, so I moved it to
RESOURCES_ASYNCHRONOUS.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jesper Pedersen 2017-11-15 13:35:26 Re: [HACKERS] A GUC to prevent leader processes from running subplans?
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-11-15 13:13:02 Re: [HACKERS] Custom compression methods