=?iso-8859-1?q?C=E9dric_Villemain?= <cedric(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I'm not sure of expected value of "max_safe_fds". Your patch now initialize
> with 5 slots instead of 10, if max_safe_fds is large maybe it is better to
> double the size each time we need instead of jumping directly to the largest
> size ?
I don't see the point particularly. At the default value of
max_files_per_process (1000), the patch can allocate at most 500 array
elements, which on a 64-bit machine would probably be 16 bytes each
or 8KB total.
regards, tom lane