Re: max_wal_senders must die

From: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: max_wal_senders must die
Date: 2010-10-19 16:06:37
Message-ID: 4CBDC20D.70201@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus wrote:
> Under what bizarre set of circumstances would anyone have runaway
> connections from replicas to the master?

Cloud computing deployments where additional replicas are brought up
automatically in response to demand. It's easy to imagine a situation
where a standby instance is spawned, starts to sync, and that additional
load triggers *another* standby to come on board; repeat until the
master is doing nothing but servicing standby sync requests.
max_wal_senders provides a safety value for that.

I think Magnus's idea to bump the default to 5 triages the worst of the
annoyance here, without dropping the feature (which has uses) or waiting
for new development to complete. I'd be in favor of just committing
that change right now, before it gets forgotten about, and then if
nobody else gets around to further work at least something improved here
for 9.1.

--
Greg Smith, 2ndQuadrant US greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support www.2ndQuadrant.us

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dimitri Fontaine 2010-10-19 16:09:47 Re: Extensions, this time with a patch
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2010-10-19 15:59:35 Re: max_wal_senders must die