Re: Patch for reserved connections for replication users

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Gibheer <gibheer(at)zero-knowledge(dot)org>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, marko(at)joh(dot)to, Mike Blackwell <maiku41(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Patch for reserved connections for replication users
Date: 2013-10-14 18:02:59
Message-ID: 525C31D3.3010006@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 10/14/2013 10:51 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Imo the complications around this prove my (way earlier) point that it'd
> be much better to treat replication connections as something entirely
> different to normal SQL connections. There's really not much overlap
> here and while there's some philosophical point to be made about it all
> being connections, from a practical POV treating them separately seems
> better.

Given that replication connections don't even appear in pg_stat_activity
now, I'd agree with you.

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2013-10-14 18:06:36 Re: buildfarm failures on smew and anole
Previous Message Thomas Fanghaenel 2013-10-14 17:57:37 Re: [SQL] Comparison semantics of CHAR data type