Re: Patch for reserved connections for replication users

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Gibheer <gibheer(at)zero-knowledge(dot)org>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, marko(at)joh(dot)to, Mike Blackwell <maiku41(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Patch for reserved connections for replication users
Date: 2013-10-14 17:26:25
Message-ID: 525C2941.5010906@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 10/13/2013 01:38 AM, Gibheer wrote:
> So it will ensure that max_wal_senders is used for reserving
>> connection slots from being used by non-super user connections. I find
>> new usage of max_wal_senders acceptable, if anyone else thinks
>> otherwise, please let us know.

I think otherwise.

Changing max_wal_senders requires a restart. As such, we currently
advise users to set the setting generously: "as many replication
connections as you think you'll ever need, plus two". If
max_wal_senders is a reservation which could cause the user to run out
of other connections sooner than expected, then the user is faced with a
new "hard to set" parameter: they don't want to set it too high *or* too
low.

This would result in a lot of user frustration as they try to get thier
connection configuration right and have to restart the server multiple
times. I find few new features worth making it *harder* to configure
PostgreSQL, and reserved replication connections certainly don't qualify.

If it's worth having reserved replication connections (and I can see
some reasons to want it), then we need a new GUC for this:
"reserved_walsender_connections"

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2013-10-14 17:30:09 Re: Long paths for tablespace leads to uninterruptible hang in Windows
Previous Message Robert Haas 2013-10-14 15:50:44 Re: dynamic shared memory