Sorry for the late reply. > additional complexity and a possible lag of progress updates. So if we > go with the current approach, I think we need to make sure enough (and > not too many) hash table entries.
The hash table can be set 4 times the size of max_worker_processes which should give more than enough padding. Note that max_parallel_maintenance_workers is what should be used, but since it's dynamic, it cannot be used to determine the size of shared memory. Regards, --- Sami Imseih Amazon Web Services
