| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Streaming replication document improvements |
| Date: | 2010-04-01 18:49:24 |
| Message-ID: | 4BB4EAB4.3020904@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
> The thing is, when dealing with new features, we reduce our overall
> maintenance burden if we get it right the first time. Obviously it's
> too late for major changes, but minor adjustments to maintain the POLA
> seem like exactly what we SHOULD be doing right now.
Oh, I agree. Since we have a separate WALSender limit, it seems
counter-intuitive and difficult-to-admin to have the WALSenders also
limited by superuser_connections. They should be their own separate
connection pool, just like the other "background" processes.
However, if this was somehow infeasible, it wouldn't be hard to
document. That's all.
--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2010-04-01 19:17:11 | Re: [DOCS] Streaming replication document improvements |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-04-01 17:58:35 | Re: [DOCS] Streaming replication document improvements |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2010-04-01 19:17:11 | Re: [DOCS] Streaming replication document improvements |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-04-01 17:58:35 | Re: [DOCS] Streaming replication document improvements |