Re: VACUUM PARALLEL option vs. max_parallel_maintenance_workers

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Peter Eisentraut
Тема Re: VACUUM PARALLEL option vs. max_parallel_maintenance_workers
Дата
Msg-id 2d2db0c5-88b1-deab-087f-3ab25ccc09cc@2ndquadrant.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: VACUUM PARALLEL option vs. max_parallel_maintenance_workers  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: VACUUM PARALLEL option vs. max_parallel_maintenance_workers
Re: VACUUM PARALLEL option vs. max_parallel_maintenance_workers
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения 
On 2020-09-21 05:48, Amit Kapila wrote:
> What according to you should be the behavior here and how will it be
> better than current?

I think if I write VACUUM (PARALLEL 5), it should use up to 5 workers 
(up to the number of indexes), even if max_parallel_maintenance_workers 
is 2.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Ajin Cherian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions
Следующее
От: Heikki Linnakangas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Yet another fast GiST build