Re: Rename max_parallel_degree? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
| From | Amit Kapila |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Rename max_parallel_degree? |
| Date | |
| Msg-id | CAA4eK1+MR0+ZkF5NadZdddMs=KqqCLbEDGR=GX7bYcWu9K+s5g@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
| In response to | Re: Rename max_parallel_degree? (Julien Rouhaud <julien.rouhaud@dalibo.com>) |
| Responses |
Re: Rename max_parallel_degree?
|
| List | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:43 PM, Julien Rouhaud
<julien.rouhaud@dalibo.com> wrote:
>
> Attached v4 implements the design you suggested, I hope everything's ok.
>
Few review comments:
1.
+ if (parallel && (BackgroundWorkerData->parallel_register_count -
+
BackgroundWorkerData->parallel_terminate_count) >=
+
max_parallel_workers)
+ return false;
I think this check should be done after acquiring
BackgroundWorkerLock, otherwise some other backend can simultaneously
increment parallel_register_count.
2.
+/*
+ * This flag is used internally for parallel queries, to keep track of the
+ * number of active
parallel workers and make sure we never launch more than
+ * max_parallel_workers parallel workers at
the same time. Third part
+ * background workers should not use this flag.
+ */
+#define
BGWORKER_IS_PARALLEL_WORKER 0x0004
+
"Third part", do yo want to say Third party?
3.
static bool
SanityCheckBackgroundWorker(BackgroundWorker *worker, int elevel)
{
..
}
Isn't it better to have a check in above function such that if
bgw_flags is BGWORKER_IS_PARALLEL_WORKER and max_parallel_workers is
zero, then ereport? Also, consider if it is better to have some other
checks related to BGWORKER_IS_PARALLEL_WORKER, like if caller sets
BGWORKER_IS_PARALLEL_WORKER, then it must have database connection and
shared memory access.
4.
+ <varlistentry id="guc-max-parallel-workers"
xreflabel="max_parallel_workers">
+ <term><varname>max_parallel_workers</varname> (<type>integer</type>)
+ <indexterm>
+ <primary><varname>max_parallel_workers</> configuration
parameter</primary>
+ </indexterm>
+ </term>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>
+ Sets the maximum number of workers that can be launched at the same
+ time for the whole server. This parameter allows the administrator to
+ reserve background worker slots for for third part dynamic background
+ workers. The default value is 4. Setting this value to 0 disables
+ parallel query execution.
+ </para>
+ </listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
How about phrasing it as:
Sets the maximum number of workers that the system can support for
parallel queries. The default value is 4. Setting this value to 0
disables parallel query execution.
5.
<primary><varname>max_parallel_workers_per_gather</> configuration
parameter</primary> </indexterm> </term> <listitem> <para> Sets the maximum number of
workersthat can be started by a single <literal>Gather</literal> node. Parallel workers are taken from the
pool of processes established by <xref linkend="guc-max-worker-processes">.
I think it is better to change above in documentation to indicate that
"pool of processes established by guc-max-parallel-workers".
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
pgsql-hackers by date: