Re: MAX_BACKENDS size (comment accuracy)

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
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 20:38:24
Message-ID: hvceozs7jbnycurw33cblufkhony3unoaigewew22vjvyta4mc@syjwlplmp566
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2025-02-24 13:52:51 -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> 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.

Makes sense.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2025-02-24 20:40:13 Re: Statistics Import and Export
Previous Message Andres Freund 2025-02-24 20:36:20 Re: Statistics Import and Export