On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 8:00 AM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 09:16:49PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > > It looks like even though the commit e5253fdc4f that added the > > parallel_leader_participation GUC correctly categorized it as > > RESOURCES_ASYNCHRONOUS parameter in the code, but in the docs it is kept > > under irrelevant section i.e. "Query Planning/Other Planner Options". This > > is reported in the bugs list [1], cc-ed the reporter. > > > > Attaching a small patch that moves the GUC description to the right place. > > Thoughts? > > I would keep the discussion on the existing thread rather than spawn a > new one on -hackers for exactly the same problem, so I'll reply there > in a minute.
I thought we might miss the discussion in the hackers list. I'm sorry for starting a new thread. I'm closing this thread. With Regards, Bharath Rupireddy. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
