On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 9:35 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 5:59 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 10:39 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Having it optional seems a good idea. BTW can the user configure how
> > > many apply bgworkers can be used per subscription or in the whole
> > > system? Like max_sync_workers_per_subscription, is it better to have a
> > > configuration parameter or a subscription option for that? If so,
> > > setting it to 0 probably means to disable the parallel apply feature.
> > >
> >
> > Yeah, that might be useful but we are already giving an option while
> > creating a subscription whether to allow parallelism, so will it be
> > useful to give one more way to disable this feature? OTOH, having
> > something like max_parallel_apply_workers/max_bg_apply_workers at the
> > system level can give better control for how much parallelism the user
> > wishes to allow for apply work.
>
> Or we can have something like
> max_parallel_apply_workers_per_subscription that controls how many
> parallel apply workers can launch per subscription. That also gives
> better control for the number of parallel apply workers.
>
I think we can go either way in this matter as both have their pros
and cons. I feel limiting the parallel workers per subscription gives
better control but OTOH, it may not allow max usage of parallelism
because some quota from other subscriptions might remain unused. Let
us see what Hou-San or others think on this matter?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.