On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:54 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> could not accept connection from the standby because max_wal_senders is 0
>
>> Well, that might still leave someone confused if they had one standby
>> and were trying to bring up a second one.
>
> I'd suggest something like "number of requested standby connections
> exceeds max_wal_senders (currently %d)"
Oh, that's much better than anything I thought of. +1.
...Robert