Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> writes: > Hmm. I wonder if we should rename force_parallel_mode to > force_gather_node in v13. The current name has always seemed slightly > misleading to me; it sounds like some kind of turbo boost button but > really it's a developer-only test mode. Also, does it belong under > DEVELOPER_OPTIONS instead of QUERY_TUNING_OTHER? I'm also wondering > if the variable single_copy would be better named > no_leader_participation or single_participant. I find "copy" a > slightly strange way to refer to the number of copies *allowed to > run*, but maybe that's just me.
FWIW, I agree 100% that these names are opaque. I don't know if your suggestions are the best we can do, but they each seem like improvements. And yes, force_parallel_mode should be under DEVELOPER_OPTIONS; it's a performance-losing test option. regards, tom lane