On 06/01/2016 02:21 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > If you lined up ten people in a room all of whom were competent > database professionals and none of whom knew anything about PostgreSQL > and asked them to guess what a setting called work_mem does and what a > setting called max_parallel_degree does, I will wager you $5 that > they'd do better on the second one. Likewise, I bet the guesses for > max_parallel_degree would be closer to the mark than the guesses for > maintenance_work_mem or replacement_sort_tuples or commit_siblings or > bgwriter_lru_multiplier.
Incidentally, the reason I didn't jump into this thread until the patches showed up is that I don't think it actually matters what the parameters are named. They're going to require documentation regardless, parallism just isn't something people grok instinctively. I care about how the parameters *work*, and whether that's consistent across our various resource management settings. -- -- Josh Berkus Red Hat OSAS (any opinions are my own) -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
