On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think that it is not worth mentioning specifically for
> temp_file_limit; to me that seems to be a hole with no bottom. We'll
> end up arguing about which GUCs should mention it specifically and
> there will be no end to it.
I don't think that you need it for any other GUC, so I really don't
know why you're concerned about a slippery slope. The only other
resource GUC that is scoped per session that I can see is
temp_buffers, but that doesn't need to change, since parallel workers
cannot use temp_buffers directly in practice. max_files_per_process is
already clearly per process, so no change needed there either.
I don't see a case other than temp_file_limit that appears to be even
marginally in need of a specific note.
--
Peter Geoghegan