| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Standby registration |
| Date: | 2010-09-22 13:54:45 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTi=3FS95tETB3ak1qqhVfVxstJV39PLCajyL8p0f@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 8:21 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> What if the number of standby entries in standby.conf is more than
> max_wal_senders? This situation is allowed if we treat standby.conf
> as just access control list like pg_hba.conf. But if we have to ensure
> that all the registered standbys can connect to the master, we should
> emit the error in that case.
I don't think a cross-check between these settings makes much sense.
We should either get rid of max_wal_senders and make it always equal
to the number of defined standbys, or we should treat them as
independent settings.
> Should we allow standby.conf to be changed and reloaded while the
> server is running?
Yes.
> But what if the
> reloaded standby.conf has no entry for already connected standby?
We kick him out?
> Should we allow multiple standbys with the same name to connect to
> the master?
No. The point of naming them is to uniquely identify them.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-09-22 13:55:54 | Re: BUG #5661: The character encoding in logfile is confusing. |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-09-22 13:50:39 | Re: Configuring synchronous replication |