On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 3:35 AM, Peter Geoghegan <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 1:31 PM, Robert Haas <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >> Can we actually call it max_parallel_maintenance_workers instead?
> >> I mean we don't have work_mem_maintenance.
> >
> > Good point.
>
> WFM.
>
>
This is good point. I agree with max_parallel_maintenance_workers.


> --
> Peter Geoghegan
>



-- 
Rushabh Lathia

Reply via email to