if I "alter table allwise set (parallel_workers = 64);" then I can get 64
workers. I wonder if the code
to check the rel_parallel_workers do deal with the default algorithm not
allocating sufficient
parallel_workers.
On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 2:54 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Greg Hennessy writes:
> >>
Greg Hennessy writes:
>> Postgres has chosen to use only a small fraction of the CPU's I have on
>> my machine. Given the query returns an answer in about 8 seconds, it may be
>> that Postgresql has allocated the proper number of works. But if I wanted
>> to try to tweak some config parameters to
Setting those values to zero (not something I'd want to do in production)
changes the number of workes
from 10 to 13. At least something, but if anyone knows where discussion
about how to use
large numbers of CPU's in postgresql are being held I'd appreciate learning
about it.
Greg
On Fri, Jul 1
From: Greg Hennessy
Date: Thursday, July 10, 2025 at 4:40 PM
To: pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: optimizing number of workers
Having just received a shiny new dual CPU machine to use as a postgresql
server, I'm trying to do some reasonable efforts to configure it correctly. The
hard
