On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 8:00 AM Michael Paquier 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
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
Hi,
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 bu