Subject: Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>,
 Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>,
 "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
References: <20160531202742.GA896974@alvherre.pgsql>
 <5641.1464731894@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+TgmoZ-gU+fDip86kN3K9AHQNyuX_TZQrcDuBOL1aVhE_-h-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <b9c23439-a1e8-6d86-9414-0aae3a1baa6e@BlueTreble.com>
 <574F030F.7030108@2ndquadrant.com>
 <CAKFQuwaky0NtdjOkU7mp1n=-WREcL6n2PKT28cTQzV7gNPWjbQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <575105B4.60506@2ndquadrant.com>
 <a2fffd92-6e59-a4eb-dd85-c5865ebca1a0@2ndquadrant.com>
 <WM!f9d4a8faf69bc1b01ed651f15cfdc80563335d4b897cf3513020fb90dbd23514e8c8fc2810ca689c5858c7811ce6b8c0!@mailstronghold-2.zmailcloud.com>
Cc: Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>, Robert Haas
 <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>,
 Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>,
 Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Magnus Hagander
 <magnus@hagander.net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>,
 PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
From: Josh berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Message-ID: <575190D2.5050107@agliodbs.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 07:14:42 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <WM!f9d4a8faf69bc1b01ed651f15cfdc80563335d4b897cf3513020fb90dbd23514e8c8fc2810ca689c5858c7811ce6b8c0!@mailstronghold-2.zmailcloud.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

On 06/02/2016 09:33 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 6/3/16 12:21 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>> On 01/06/16 17:55, David G. Johnston wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com
>>> <mailto:petr@2ndquadrant.com>>wrote:
>>>
>>>     That GUC also controls worker processes that are started by
>>>     extensions, not just ones that parallel query starts. This is btw
>>>     one thing I don't like at all about how the current limits work, the
>>>     parallel query will fight for workers with extensions because they
>>>     share the same limit.
>>>
>>>
>>> =E2=80=8BGiven that this models reality the GUC is doing its job.  Now,=
 maybe we
>>> need additional knobs to give the end-user the ability to influence how
>>> those fights will turn out.
>>
>> Agreed, my point is that I think we do need additional knob.
>=20
> We need one knob to control how many process slots to create at server
> start, and then a bunch of sliders to control how to allocate those
> between regular connections, superuser connections, replication,
> autovacuum, parallel workers, background workers (by tag/label/group),
> and so on.

Now that's crazy talk.  I mean, next thing you'll be saying that we need
the ability to monitor this, or even change it at runtime.  Where does
the madness end?  ;-)

Seriously, you have a point here; it's maybe time to stop tackling
process management per server piecemeal.  Question is, who wants to work
on this?

--=20
--
Josh Berkus
Red Hat OSAS
(any opinions are my own)


--=20
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers