Re: [HACKERS] force_parallel_mode uniqueness

2016-05-09 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 2:23 PM, David G. Johnston wrote: > I was thinking more along the lines that it should be called: > > parallel_mode (enum) > > It would default to "on" > > "off" would turn it off (instead of having to set parallel_degree to 0) > > And it would have additional enum values fo

Re: [HACKERS] force_parallel_mode uniqueness

2016-05-08 Thread David G. Johnston
On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 11:42 PM, David G. Johnston > wrote: > > All of the other planner GUCs are basically, {on, off, special} with on > or > > special the default as appropriate for the feature - since most/all > features > > default to ena

Re: [HACKERS] force_parallel_mode uniqueness

2016-05-08 Thread Robert Haas
On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 11:42 PM, David G. Johnston wrote: > All of the other planner GUCs are basically, {on, off, special} with on or > special the default as appropriate for the feature - since most/all features > default to enabled. While I get that the expected usage is to set this to > off (

[HACKERS] force_parallel_mode uniqueness

2016-05-07 Thread David G. Johnston
My take below is that of a user reading our documentation and our projected consistency via that document. All of the other planner GUCs are basically, {on, off, special} with on or special the default as appropriate for the feature - since most/all features default to enabled. While I get that t