On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 5:42 PM, Peter Geoghegan <p...@bowt.ie> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I share your general feelings on all of this, but I really don't know >>> what to do about it. Which of these alternatives is the least worst, >>> all things considered? >> >> Let's get the patch committed without any explicit way of forcing the >> number of workers and then think about adding that later. > > It could be argued that you need some way of forcing low memory in > workers with any committed version. So while this sounds reasonable, > it might not be compatible with throwing out what I've done with > force_parallel_mode up-front, before you commit anything. What do you > think?
I think the force_parallel_mode thing is too ugly to live. I'm not sure that forcing low memory in workers is a thing we need to have, but if we do, then we'll have to invent some other way to have it. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
