Re: sorry, too many standbys already vs. MaxWalSenders vs. max_wal_senders

Thom Brown <thombrown@gmail.com>

View thread

From: Thom Brown <thombrown@gmail.com>

To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org

Date: 2010-03-31T15:24:38Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

sr_error_message_v2.patch (application/octet-stream) patch v2

On 31 March 2010 15:45, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:54 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>    could not accept connection from the standby because max_wal_senders
> is 0
> >
> >> Well, that might still leave someone confused if they had one standby
> >> and were trying to bring up a second one.
> >
> > I'd suggest something like "number of requested standby connections
> > exceeds max_wal_senders (currently %d)"
>
> Oh, that's much better than anything I thought of.  +1.
>
> ...Robert
>
>
That provides more explicit information. :)