Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Connection limit and Superuser

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Connection limit and Superuser
Date: 2006-07-31 13:15:03
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 08:47:38AM -0400, Rod Taylor wrote:
>> It appears that the superuser does not have connection limit
>> enforcement. I think this should be changed.
> So if some admin process goes awry and uses up all the connection
> slots, how does the admin get in to see what's happening? If there's a
> limit you're not really superuser, are you?
>> Slony in particular does not need more than N connections but does
>> require being a super user.
> Maybe someone should look into enabling slony to not run as a
> superuser?

That was my initial reaction to this suggestion. But then I realised 
that it might well make sense to have a separate connection-limited 
superuser for Slony purposes (or any other special purpose) alongside an 
unlimited superuser. If we were restricted to having just one superuser 
I would be much more inclined to agree with you.  Perhaps if this 
suggestion were to be adopted it could be argued that the superuser 
reserved connection slots should be kept only for superusers that are 
not connection-limited.



In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2006-07-31 13:15:20
Subject: Re: User-defined typle similar to char(length) varchar(length)
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2006-07-31 13:08:55
Subject: Re: DTrace enabled build fails

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group