Re: [PATCH] force_parallel_mode and GUC categories

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] force_parallel_mode and GUC categories
Date: 2021-04-14 06:57:21
Message-ID: YHaSUbjPeh1XesoJ@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 07:31:39AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Good point.

Thanks. I have used the wording that Tom has proposed upthread, added
one GUC_NOT_IN_SAMPLE that you forgot, and applied the
force_parallel_mode patch.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2021-04-14 07:20:08 Re: jsonb subscripting assignment performance
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2021-04-14 06:39:40 Re: Replication slot stats misgivings

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2021-04-14 13:20:46 Re: LWLocks by LockManager slowing large DB
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2021-04-14 04:54:34 Re: [PATCH] force_parallel_mode and GUC categories