From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Streaming replication document improvements |
Date: | 2010-04-01 01:50:13 |
Message-ID: | u2w3f0b79eb1003311850m50193801tb49b04966f5544d0@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 5:39 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Fujii Masao wrote:
>> ***************
>> *** 829,834 **** if (!triggered)
>> --- 826,834 ----
>> <para>
>> Set the maximum number of concurrent connections from the standby servers
>> (see <xref linkend="guc-max-wal-senders"> for details).
>> + Since those connections are for superusers,
>> + <xref linkend="guc-superuser-reserved-connections"> should be
>> + set accordingly.
>> </para>
>> </listitem>
>> <listitem>
>
> That's an interesting point, do streaming replication connections
> consume superuser_reserved_connections slots?
Yes. Since SR connection is superuser connection, setting
superuser_reserved_connections appropriately would be useful
to prevent non-superuser connections from blocking the connection
from the standby.
> How should
> superuser_reserved_connections be set?
Well.. setting the number of superuser connection required for
maintenance plus max_wal_senders seems to be reasonable.
>> *** a/src/backend/access/transam/recovery.conf.sample
>> --- b/src/backend/access/transam/recovery.conf.sample
>> ***************
>> *** 88,94 ****
>> #recovery_target_timeline = '33' # number or 'latest'
>> #
>> #---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ! # LOG-STREAMING REPLICATION PARAMETERS
>> #---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> #
>> # When standby_mode is enabled, the PostgreSQL server will work as
>> --- 88,94 ----
>> #recovery_target_timeline = '33' # number or 'latest'
>> #
>> #---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ! # STANDBY SERVER PARAMETERS
>> #---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> #
>> # When standby_mode is enabled, the PostgreSQL server will work as
>
> Hmm, that makes the HOT STANDBY notice after that section look weird:
>
>> #---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> # HOT STANDBY PARAMETERS
>> #---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> #
>> # Hot Standby related parameters are listed in postgresql.conf
>> #
>> #---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Do we need that notice? Maybe just move that sentence to the "STANDBY
> SERVER PARAMETERS" section.
I don't think that the notice is necessary. But I agree to the move.
> I just committed a patch to move around the high-availability sections a
> bit. That caused conflicts with this patch, so I picked the changes from
> the patch and applied them over the new layout, and I also did a lot of
> other editing. So, I committed most parts of this patch (except the
> above), with a lot of changes to fix the bit-rot, and also other editing
> to my liking. I hope I made it better not worse.
Thanks a lot!
doc/src/sgml/monitoring.sgml
> + In streaming replication (see <xref linkend="streaming-replication"> for details),
> + WAL sender process is listed in the <command>ps</> display on the primary server.
> + The form of its command line display is:
> + <screen>
> + postgres: wal sender process <replaceable>user</> <replaceable>host</> streaming <replaceable>location</>
> + </screen>
> + The user and host items remain the same for the life of the replication connection.
> + The location indicates how far WAL sender process has sent the WAL.
> + On the other hand, WAL receiver process is listed in the <command>ps</> display
> + on the standby server. The form of its command line display is:
> + <screen>
> + postgres: wal receiver process streaming <replaceable>location</>
> + </screen>
> + The location indicates how far WAL receiver has received the WAL.
> + </para>
> +
> + <para>
The original patch includes the above change for monitoring.sgml, but
it's been excluded from the commit. You think that it's not worth applying
the change?
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-04-01 01:52:48 | Re: [DOCS] Streaming replication document improvements |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-04-01 00:31:32 | Re: confusing archive_command example |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-04-01 01:52:48 | Re: [DOCS] Streaming replication document improvements |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-04-01 01:43:37 | Re: sorry, too many standbys already vs. MaxWalSenders vs. max_wal_senders |