Horton
Menu

Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Josh berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2016-06-03T12:20:28Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Josh berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
> I was assuming that we would have *both* per-operation and per-statement
> limits.  I can see reasons for having both, I can see why power users
> would want both, but it's going to be overwhelming to casual users.

I don't think so.  I think the fact that this is per-gather-node
rather than per-statement right now is basically a defect.  Once we
have a per-statement limit, I see no value in having the
per-gather-node setting.  So, yes, at that point, I would push to
rename the GUC.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company