| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| 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: | 2010-04-21 16:20:59 |
| Message-ID: | 25094.1271866859@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Thanks for the heads up. It doesn't look hard to put a similar test
> in the walsender code path, but is there any reason to duplicate the
> code? Seems like we might be able to just put this test (with the
> necessary modification) right before this comment:
Hm, actually I think you're right: we could move both of those
connection-rejecting tests up to before the walsender exit. The
only extra state we need is ReservedBackends, which should be valid
at that point (in particular, it can't be affected by any process-local
GUC settings).
+1 for just moving the test.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-04-21 17:29:15 | Re: [HACKERS] Streaming replication document improvements |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-04-21 16:10:10 | Re: [HACKERS] Streaming replication document improvements |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-04-21 16:32:26 | Re: Move tablespace |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-04-21 16:10:10 | Re: [HACKERS] Streaming replication document improvements |