Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree context level

2016-03-21 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 3:01 AM, David Rowley wrote: > On 12 February 2016 at 04:55, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: >>> Is it slower if you request N workers, yet only 1 is available? >> >> I sure hope so. There may be some cases where more workers ar

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree context level

2016-03-20 Thread David Rowley
On 12 February 2016 at 04:55, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: >> Is it slower if you request N workers, yet only 1 is available? > > I sure hope so. There may be some cases where more workers are slower > than fewer workers, but those cases are defects t

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree context level

2016-02-11 Thread Joe Conway
On 02/11/2016 07:55 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: >> If you make max_worker_processes USERSET won't everybody just set it to >> max_worker_processes? > > I think that you meant for the first instance of max_worker_processes > in that sentence to be

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree context level

2016-02-11 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > A few questions and thoughts to help decide... > > Does it take into account the parallel degree during planning? > Does it take into account the actual parallel degree during planning? max_worker_processes is a query planner GUC, just like w

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree context level

2016-02-11 Thread Simon Riggs
On 11 February 2016 at 12:40, Thom Brown wrote: > Hi all, > > As it currently stands, max_parallel_degree is set to a superuser > context, but we probably want to discuss whether we want to keep it > this way prior to releasing 9.6. Might we want to reduce its level so > that users can adjust it

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree context level

2016-02-11 Thread Dean Rasheed
On 11 February 2016 at 13:18, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 7:40 AM, Thom Brown wrote: >> As it currently stands, max_parallel_degree is set to a superuser >> context > > I don't have a clue why it's like that. It seems like it should be > PGC_USERSSET just like, say, work_mem. I

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree context level

2016-02-11 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 7:40 AM, Thom Brown wrote: > As it currently stands, max_parallel_degree is set to a superuser > context, but we probably want to discuss whether we want to keep it > this way prior to releasing 9.6. Might we want to reduce its level so > that users can adjust it according