Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?

Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>

From: Josh berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2016-05-31T18:38:30Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 05/31/2016 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
>> One more consistency question: what's the effect of running out of
>> max_parallel_workers?
> 
> ITYM max_worker_processes (ie, the cluster-wide pool size)?

Yes.  Sorry for contributing to the confusion.  Too many
similar-sounding parameter names.


-- 
--
Josh Berkus
Red Hat OSAS
(any opinions are my own)