Re: max_wal_senders must die

Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
> > On 10/20/10 6:54 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> I find it impossible to believe that's
> >> a good decision, and IMHO we should be focusing on how to make the
> >> parameters PGC_SIGHUP rather than PGC_POSTMASTER, which would give us
> >> most of the same benefits without throwing away hard-won performance.
> >
> > I'd be happy to accept that. ?Is it possible, though?
> 
> I sketched an outline of the problem AIUI here:
> 
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-10/msg01348.php
> 
> I think it's possible; I'm not quite sure how hard it is.
> Unfortunately, I've not had as much PG-hacking time lately as I'd
> like...

Have we documented these TODOs?

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + It's impossible for everything to be true. +