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)