Re: Streaming replication document improvements

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? How should
superuser_reserved_connections be set?

> *** 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 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.

--
  Heikki Linnakangas
  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com