| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Evgeniy Shishkin <itparanoia(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation) |
| Date: | 2018-01-10 21:31:06 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoahL-7_hjwAb0bk_JOCo3E_yavn_PF5KFM==fj=63VG7w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 3:29 PM, Evgeniy Shishkin <itparanoia(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Jan 10, 2018, at 21:45, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> The documentation for max_parallel_workers_maintenance cribs from the
>> documentation for max_parallel_workers_per_gather in saying that we'll
>> use fewer workers than expected "which may be inefficient".
>
> Can we actually call it max_parallel_maintenance_workers instead?
> I mean we don't have work_mem_maintenance.
Good point.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2018-01-10 21:31:10 | Re: PATCH: Configurable file mode mask |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2018-01-10 21:30:32 | Re: let's make the list of reportable GUCs configurable (was Re: Add %r substitution for psql prompts to show recovery status) |