| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Streaming replication document improvements |
| Date: | 2010-04-01 17:29:06 |
| Message-ID: | 19262.1270142946@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> That seems pretty reasonable to me. I haven't checked how much code
> impact there is. I know Tom doesn't think we should change it at all,
> but surely pre-beta is the time to fix nasty corner cases that were
> added by recently committed patches?
What nasty corner case? Having replication connections use superuser
reserved slots seems exactly the behavior I'd expect given that they are
running as superuser. I agree it would be good to decouple that later,
but we already decided we are not going to try to separate replication
privilege from superuser in 9.0.
(Also, autovacuum workers are a quite separate concept since the DBA
doesn't set them up or deal with them directly. So I'm unimpressed by
pointing to the treatment of autovacuum_max_workers as a precedent.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-04-01 17:44:29 | Re: [DOCS] Streaming replication document improvements |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-04-01 17:18:45 | Re: [DOCS] Streaming replication document improvements |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-04-01 17:44:29 | Re: [DOCS] Streaming replication document improvements |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2010-04-01 17:28:47 | Re: mremap and bus error |