Re: Accommodate startup process in a separate ProcState array slot instead of in MaxBackends slots.
Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
From: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
To: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-10-12T06:46:07Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 5:37 AM Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote: > > On 2021/10/12 4:07, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > > Hi, > > > > While working on [1], it is found that currently the ProcState array > > doesn't have entries for auxiliary processes, it does have entries for > > MaxBackends. But the startup process is eating up one slot from > > MaxBackends. We need to increase the size of the ProcState array by 1 > > at least for the startup process. The startup process uses ProcState > > slot via InitRecoveryTransactionEnvironment->SharedInvalBackendInit. > > The procState array size is initialized to MaxBackends in > > SInvalShmemSize. > > > > The consequence of not fixing this issue is that the database may hit > > the error "sorry, too many clients already" soon in > > SharedInvalBackendInit. > > > > Attaching a patch to fix this issue. Thoughts? > > Thanks for making the patch! LGTM. > Barring any objection, I will commit it. Thanks for reviewing. I've made a CF entry for this, just to ensure the tests on different CF bot server passes(and yes no failures) - https://commitfest.postgresql.org/35/3355/ Regards, Bharath Rupireddy.
Commits
-
Explain why the startup process can't cause a shortage of sinval slots.
- edea649afbce 15.0 landed