| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jacob Brazeal <jacob(dot)brazeal(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: MAX_BACKENDS size (comment accuracy) |
| Date: | 2025-02-24 19:52:51 |
| Message-ID: | Z7zOEzz8lNjaU9yf@nathan |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
The recent commits for this drew my attention to the comment for
MAX_BACKENDS. Specifically, it says we check the value in
RegisterBackgroundWorker() (which appears to have been untrue since we
added max_worker_processes) and relevant GUC check hooks (which I removed
last year in commit 0b1fe14). I wrote a short patch to fix this, which I
intend to commit soon unless there is feedback.
--
nathan
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v1-0001-Fix-comment-for-MAX_BACKENDS.patch | text/plain | 1.5 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2025-02-24 20:03:58 | Re: Statistics Import and Export |
| Previous Message | Daniel Verite | 2025-02-24 19:52:44 | pgbench client-side performance issue on large scripts |