On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Christoph Berg <m...@debian.org> wrote:
> Re: Robert Haas 2016-05-02 
> <CA+TgmobRmK649eDYvF6dgnQJNJVJvZffDz674wD+GWqCcb=y...@mail.gmail.com>
>> max_parallel_degree -> max_parallel_workers
>> parallel_degree -> parallel_workers
>> I would prefer to keep it as "degree".  It's a reasonable term of art,
>> and it also improves grep-ability.  But I'm willing to go do the above
>> renaming if there is a clear consensus behind it.  Alternatively, I'm
>> willing to make it 1-based rather than 0-based if there is a clear
>> consensus on that option, though unsurprisingly I prefer it the way it
>> is now.  Do we have such a consensus?
> Fwiw the one thing I remember from when I read first about the feature
> was a big "wtf if I set that to 1, I'll actually get 2 processes?". So
> +1 on doing *something* about it.

To be clear, you'll get 1 new process in addition to the 1 that is
already running.  But vote noted.

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