| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | Adam Witney <awitney(at)sghms(dot)ac(dot)uk>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Beta4 Tag'd and Bundled ... |
| Date: | 2003-10-04 17:29:23 |
| Message-ID: | 14448.1065288563@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> writes:
>> Hm. The parallel regression tests require at least 20. I deliberately
>> allowed initdb to select values as small as 10 on the theory that
>> installing and not being able to run the parallel regression tests is
>> better than not installing at all.
> Another alternative is to have the regression suite discover the max
> connections, and defer tests when there are (max_connections - 1)
> connections already.
Maybe. After thinking a bit more, I seem to recall one of the reasons
for having wide parallel sets in the regression tests is that we
*wanted* to consider inability to support a dozen or two connections as
a serious problem. If we still believe that old logic, then indeed the
right thing to do is for initdb to insist on setting max_connections no
smaller than 20. (Pre-7.4, the default setting was generally 32, so
this is still more flexible than before from a portability standpoint.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-10-04 17:48:47 | Re: count(*) slow on large tables |
| Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2003-10-04 17:20:42 | Re: Beta4 Tag'd and Bundled ... |