Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2016-04-26T15:34:49Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> I think the word "degree" is largely seen as a bad idea: it would become
>> a somewhat better idea only if we change how it works so that it matches
>> what other DBMSs do, but you oppose that.  Hence my proposal to get rid
>> of that word in the UI.

> Well I agree with that up to a point, but I think ALTER TABLE foo SET
> (parallelism = 4) is not a model of clarity.  "parallelism" or
> "parallel" is not obviously an integer quality.  I guess we could
> s/parallel_degree/parallel_workers/g.  I find that terminology less
> elegant than "parallel degree", but I can live with it.

Shouldn't it be "max_parallel_workers", at least in some contexts?
Otherwise, I'd read it as a promise that exactly that many workers
will be used.

			regards, tom lane