From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, 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: | 2016-06-08 03:01:07 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZF+-ckDHethxzznM-b-vraFvUXz-jXTDA8-cCUodpzGg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I think we should just go with max_parallel_workers for a limit on
>> total parallel workers within max_work_processes, and
>> max_parallel_workers_per_gather for a per-Gather limit. It's slightly
>> annoying that we may end up renaming the latter GUC, but not as
>> annoying as spending another three weeks debating this and missing
>> beta2.
>
> +1. I'm not as convinced as you are that we'll replace the GUC later,
> but in any case this is an accurate description of the current
> semantics. And I'm really *not* in favor of fudging the name with
> the intent of changing the GUC's semantics later --- that would fail
> all sorts of compatibility expectations.
Here's a patch change max_parallel_degree to
max_parallel_workers_per_gather, and also changing parallel_degree to
parallel_workers. I haven't tackled adding a separate
max_parallel_workers, at least not yet. Are people OK with this?
Note that there is a dump/restore hazard if people have set the
parallel_degree reloption on a beta1 install, or used ALTER { USER |
DATABASE } .. SET parallel_degree. Can everybody live with that?
Should I bump catversion when applying this?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
parallel-degree-to-workers-v1.patch | binary/octet-stream | 31.8 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-06-08 03:04:05 | Re: [BUGS] Routine analyze of single column prevents standard autoanalyze from running at all |
Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2016-06-08 02:41:30 | Re: [sqlsmith] Failed assertion in postgres_fdw/deparse.c:1116 |