On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> I still think >> max_parallel_workers is confusingly similar to max_worker_processes, >> but nothing's going to make everyone completely happy here. > > Well, what was suggested upthread was to change all of these to follow > the pattern max_foo_workers or max_foo_worker_processes, where foo would > (hopefully) clarify the scope in which the limitation applies.
Well, I don't like max_node_parallel_degree much. We don't call it max_node_work_mem. And node is not exactly a term that's going to be more familiar to the average PostgreSQL user than parallel degree is to (apparently) the average PostgreSQL developer. I think at some point adding noise words hurts more than it helps, and you've just got to ask people to RTFM if they really want to understand. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers