Re: CONNECTION LIMIT and Parallel Query don't play well together

From: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: CONNECTION LIMIT and Parallel Query don't play well together
Date: 2017-01-26 12:59:51
Message-ID: CAKJS1f8vtusAjhRd=n4Vr_nhq++=qSUHpqEMmaF9eWA9jC49vA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12 January 2017 at 15:24, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> I've attached a patch which intended to assist discussions on this topic.
>
> The patch adds some notes to the docs to mention that background
> workers and prepared xacts are not counted in CONNECTION LIMIT, it
> then goes on and makes CountUserBackends() ignore bgworkers. It was
> already ignoring prepared xacts. There's a bit of plumbing work to
> make the proc array aware of the background worker status. Hopefully
> this is suitable. I'm not all that close to that particular area of
> the code.

Hi Robert,

Wondering you've had any time to glance over this?

If you think the patch needs more work, or goes about things the wrong
way, let me know, and I'll make the changes.

Thanks

--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jesper Pedersen 2017-01-26 13:08:24 Re: Microvacuum support for Hash Index
Previous Message David Rowley 2017-01-26 12:54:38 Re: Performance improvement for joins where outer side is unique