Re: [PATCH] Don't bail with legitimate -N/-B options

I wrote:
> Anyway, it seems that we cannot raise the minimum value of
> shared_buffers to 200, or even 100, unless we are prepared to blow off
> SHMMAX = 2MB or do something about the fixed SLRU allocation.

After further thought I propose that we just eliminate the interlock
between -N and -B. I don't think it's accomplishing anything very
useful (for sure it's not enough to guarantee that you can't run out of
pinnable buffers), and the addition of the autovac worker processes
makes the whole thing too confusing to be helpful.

I am still interested in a TODO of increasing the minimum allowed value
of shared_buffers, but that's really an independent issue. And we can't
do very much there anyway until after eliminating the fixed-size-SLRU-
buffers problem.

regards, tom lane