On 8 March 2017 at 09:32, Robert Haas wrote:
> Committed.
Thanks!
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscripti
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 8:02 AM, David Rowley
> wrote:
>> On 7 March 2017 at 15:21, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> +1. How about changing the description of
>>> max_parallel_workers_per_gather to "taken from max_worker_processes,
>>> limited by max_pa
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 8:02 AM, David Rowley
wrote:
> On 7 March 2017 at 15:21, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> +1. How about changing the description of
>> max_parallel_workers_per_gather to "taken from max_worker_processes,
>> limited by max_parallel_workers"?
>
> Thanks for looking.
>
> Seems more accu
On 7 March 2017 at 15:21, Amit Kapila wrote:
> +1. How about changing the description of
> max_parallel_workers_per_gather to "taken from max_worker_processes,
> limited by max_parallel_workers"?
Thanks for looking.
Seems more accurate to say that it's "taken from
max_parallel_workers", maybe.
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 6:39 AM, David Rowley
wrote:
> While scanning over postgresql.conf I happened to notice something
> that didn't ring quite true about max_parallel_workers. The comment
> confuses worker_processes with parallel workers.
>
+1. How about changing the description of
max_parall
While scanning over postgresql.conf I happened to notice something
that didn't ring quite true about max_parallel_workers. The comment
confuses worker_processes with parallel workers.
The attached aims to put this right.
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL
