On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> FWIW, I agree with Bruce that using "degree" here is a poor choice.
> It's an unnecessary dependence on technical terminology that many people
> will not be familiar with.

And many others will.  Some made-up term that is entirely
PostgreSQL-specific is not going to be better.

> Well, that just says that we'd better reconsider *both* of those names.
> Frankly, neither of them is well chosen, and the fact that they currently
> sound unrelated is a bug not a feature.  What about something like
> "max_overall_worker_processes" and "max_session_worker_processes"?

The first one is fine except for the IMHO-fatal defect that
max_worker_processes has been around since 9.4, and I think it's far
too late to rename it.  Should we rename max_connections to
max_overall_connections at the same time?

The second one is wrong for at least two reasons: it's not a
per-session maximum, and it's not a maximum of all worker processes,
just parallel workers.

Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to