Docs: Move parallel_leader_participation GUC description under relevant category
Hackorum builds and tests every patch posted to the lists, not only commitfest submissions. This is Hackorum's own CI rather than the PostgreSQL project's, and it is still under testing - please report anything that looks wrong.
You can run a PostgreSQL built from this patch straight from Docker, with no checkout and no build:
docker run --rm -p 5432:5432 ghcr.io/hackorum-dev/postgres-patch:t44082psql -h localhost -U postgresBuilt from patchset v1 (message #1), July 27, 2026 at 05:13 PM.
Every patchset is also pushed to a branch of our PostgreSQL fork, so you can check out the same tree CI built. Without a PostgreSQL checkout:
git clone --branch t44082_1 https://github.com/hackorum-dev/postgres.gitIn a checkout you already have, add the fork once:
git remote add hackorum https://github.com/hackorum-dev/postgres.gitthen, for this patchset and every later one:
git fetch hackorum t44082_1 && git checkout t44082_1Patchset v1 (message #1) is on t44082_1
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 bugs list [1]/messages/by-id/16972-42d4b0c15aa1d5f5@postgresql.org, cc-ed the reporter.
Attaching a small patch that moves the GUC description to the right place.
Thoughts?
[1]: /messages/by-id/16972-42d4b0c15aa1d5f5@postgresql.org
/messages/by-id/16972-42d4b0c15aa1d5f5@postgresql.org
With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
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.
--
Michael
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 8:00 AM Michael Paquier <michael@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