| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Streaming replication document improvements |
| Date: | 2010-04-20 13:42:51 |
| Message-ID: | k2j603c8f071004200642l6373987fz84182d348881f0c2@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> If replication connections can use up superuser_reserved_connections
>> slots, then it's very possible that this safety valve will fail
>> completely.
>
> Only if replication can use up *all* the superuser_reserved_connections
> slots.
Sure. In many cases someone will have 3
superuser_reserved_connections and only 1 wal_sender, so it won't be
an issue. However, I still think we oughta make this (apparently
one-line) fix so that people will have the number of emergency
superuser connections that they expect to have, rather than some
smaller number that might be 0 if they have a number of SR slaves.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-04-20 13:47:08 | Re: [HACKERS] Streaming replication document improvements |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-04-20 13:40:05 | Re: [HACKERS] Streaming replication document improvements |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Boszormenyi Zoltan | 2010-04-20 13:46:26 | SpinLockAcquire question |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-04-20 13:40:05 | Re: [HACKERS] Streaming replication document improvements |