Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Josh berkus
Тема Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?
Дата
Msg-id 574DD64A.9090600@agliodbs.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Ответы Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 05/31/2016 11:17 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 5/31/16 2:02 PM, Josh berkus wrote:
>> I get where you're coming from, but I think Haas's query plan output is
>> going to show us the confusion we're going to get.  So we need to either
>> change the parameter, the explain output, or brace ourselves for endless
>> repeated questions.
> 
> Changing the explain output doesn't sound so bad to me.
> 
> The users' problem is that the parameter setting ought to match the
> EXPLAIN output.
> 
> The developers' problem is that the EXPLAIN output actually corresponds
> to leader + (N-1) workers internally.
> 
> I think we can hope that developers are going to be less confused about
> that than users.

Makes sense.

One more consistency question: what's the effect of running out of
max_parallel_workers?

That is, say max_parallel_workers is set to 10, and 8 are already
allocated.  If I ask for max_parallel_X = 4, how many cores to I use?

Presumably the leader isn't counted towards max_parallel_workers?

-- 
--
Josh Berkus
Red Hat OSAS
(any opinions are my own)



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Rename synchronous_standby_names?
Следующее
От: Peter Geoghegan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?