Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Julien Rouhaud <julien.rouhaud@dalibo.com>,
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>,
"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@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: 2016-09-23T12:54:55Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 9/20/16 4:07 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > No, I'm assuming that the classes would be built-in. A string tag > seems like over-engineering to me, particularly because the postmaster > needs to switch on the tag, and we need to be very careful about the > degree to which the postmaster trusts the contents of shared memory. I'm hoping that we can come up with something that extensions can participate in, without the core having to know ahead of time what those extensions are or how they would be categorized. My vision is something like max_processes = 512 # requires restart process_allowances = 'connection:300 superuser:10 autovacuum:10 parallel:30 replication:10 someextension:20 someotherextension:20' # does not require restart -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services