Re: Modeling consumed shmem sizes, and some thorns
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Modeling consumed shmem sizes, and some thorns |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+U5nM+QCoahQ23hFx-WmqLCfHyAJFWrn-U0Eh5Z_jwpHSVfrw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Modeling consumed shmem sizes, and some thorns (Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Modeling consumed shmem sizes, and some thorns
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com> wrote: > Besides accuracy, there is a thornier problem here that has to do with > hot standby (although the use case is replication more generally) when > one has heterogeneously sized database resources. As-is, it is > required that locking-related structures -- max_connections, > max_prepared_xacts, and max_locks_per_xact (but not predicate locks, > is that an oversight?) must be a larger number on a standby than on a > primary. >= not > so you can use the same values on both sides Predicate locks aren't set in recovery so the value isn't checked as a required parameter value. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: