> The thing is, when dealing with new features, we reduce our overall
> maintenance burden if we get it right the first time.  Obviously it's
> too late for major changes, but minor adjustments to maintain the POLA
> seem like exactly what we SHOULD be doing right now.

Oh, I agree.  Since we have a separate WALSender limit, it seems
counter-intuitive and difficult-to-admin to have the WALSenders also
limited by superuser_connections.  They should be their own separate
connection pool, just like the other "background" processes.

However, if this was somehow infeasible, it wouldn't be hard to
document.  That's all.

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

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to