From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>,
        PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?
In-reply-to: 
 <CA+Tgmoag-iewx9R=vY8wWoRrNeqjng+SQehiAs7EeRc5nkQ1Og@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20160424035859.GB29404@momjian.us>
 <CA+Tgmoag-iewx9R=vY8wWoRrNeqjng+SQehiAs7EeRc5nkQ1Og@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
	message dated "Sun, 24 Apr 2016 14:08:40 -0400"
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2016 14:23:43 -0400
Message-ID: <28117.1461522223@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 11:58 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>> Why is the parallelism variable called "max_parallel_degree"?  Is that a
>> descriptive name?  What does "degree" mean?  Why is it not called
>> "max_parallel_workers"?

> Because "degree of parallelism" is standard terminology, I guess.

FWIW, I agree with Bruce that using "degree" here is a poor choice.
It's an unnecessary dependence on technical terminology that many people
will not be familiar with.

> Also, consider that we have the related but actually sorta different
> GUC max_worker_processes.  I think max_parallel_workers to control the
> per-query behavior and max_worker_processes to control the global
> system behavior would be confusing - those names are very close
> together.

Well, that just says that we'd better reconsider *both* of those names.
Frankly, neither of them is well chosen, and the fact that they currently
sound unrelated is a bug not a feature.  What about something like
"max_overall_worker_processes" and "max_session_worker_processes"?

			regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers