Re: [HACKERS] Installation procedure.

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "J(dot) Michael Roberts" <mirobert(at)cs(dot)indiana(dot)edu>
Cc: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Installation procedure.
Date: 1999-08-02 05:09:43
Message-ID: 151.933570583@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"J. Michael Roberts" <mirobert(at)cs(dot)indiana(dot)edu> writes:
> Now to figure out how to get the changes to you
> guys.... Is the procedure simply to diff it and email it to somebody, or
> what?

Standard operating procedure is to make a patch-compatible diff
(I think -c format is preferred) and post it to the pgsql-patches
mailing list. If you have a real good idea which core member is
probably going to apply the patch you could send it just to that
person, but it's more courteous to put it on the public mailing list.

> As to whether MAXBACKENDS should be changed -- I have no idea what impact
> that would actually have. What *is* a backend, precisely? In Illustra,
> anyway, each active query starts a new process while it's working -- is
> that a backend?

No. There's one backend process per client connection; it lives till
the client disconnects, and handles all queries that come through that
connection. So MAXBACKENDS really means "how many simultaneous
clients am I expecting"?

regards, tom lane

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message The Hermit Hacker 1999-08-02 05:21:42 Re: [HACKERS] Installation procedure.
Previous Message J. Michael Roberts 1999-08-02 04:56:08 Re: [HACKERS] Installation procedure.