Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.204.183])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A5A56324A1;
	Tue, 20 Apr 2010 06:48:03 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia,
	port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 22582-04; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 09:47:53 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-gy0-f174.google.com (mail-gy0-f174.google.com
	[209.85.160.174])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73212632C2E;
	Tue, 20 Apr 2010 06:47:52 -0300 (ADT)
Received: by gyg13 with SMTP id 13so3124080gyg.19
	for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 02:47:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references
	:date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=hOAZYdsZulS3xXJ3JtCew04lkATnLItxt5Jiuq3eaNE=;
	b=V/qM2iHcKHEDFzf75tJk44ah2/t3yUe4dyOYE6PXHDtR4jqk8CD/cTtJtXKYcMMqnX
	U2lUFf+OeVWZmE03MchZ27GQwc8rmZDpFH0JOWjcJ3o1ob7vwIN2GMnccucRW7p5MZNp
	Q0i6j6WqzWfGFXcH6nprhVgiZVhpeQ3nuuXrE=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	b=A5ySa5Nn4mvwV5zyU6Iy9pvwMwHgAHMlybdafBuPjaDaE3DyxECz8mWLCn5FzFfE0N
	FJwY+qQ/APdb8ThLMbhgZOXr3fEZ8USh+x+Y/7o4C9Qc6HxbmRVG8heYbjwqOIZBEtV9
	E1C+vYL5y1GgeoWtah7ib3WfKoN3nDafgCquw=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.100.142.12 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 02:47:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <w2z603c8f071004191904yefcaba2fy1abc2020174a35c5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3f0b79eb1003300152g5327eb47w8f9aecae6002b215@mail.gmail.com>
	<o2u3f0b79eb1003311914i6c9d896bic3d1b13152c6b0d8@mail.gmail.com>
	<4BB49B0C.1050901@enterprisedb.com>
	<j2t603c8f071004011018tbdcc5d17y1fe17b29ab08703c@mail.gmail.com>
	<19262.1270142946@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<4BB4952D0200002500030333@gw.wicourts.gov>
	<4BB4DBEF.3010301@agliodbs.com>
	<o2m603c8f071004011058neb6e0ea1r1f5caccbb7c50402@mail.gmail.com>
	<k2i3f0b79eb1004012306xdfa88c1cudd77b61368c997ea@mail.gmail.com>
	<w2z603c8f071004191904yefcaba2fy1abc2020174a35c5@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 18:47:51 +0900
Received: by 10.100.50.7 with SMTP id x7mr14830851anx.191.1271756871738; Tue,
	20 Apr 2010 02:47:51 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <s2u3f0b79eb1004200247q2f1c35f0pc7bf4af306f3514c@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Streaming replication document improvements
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>,
	Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>,
	Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>,
	pgsql-docs@postgresql.org,
	PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.42 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9,
	FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FS_REPLICA=3.599, SARE_SPEC_REPLICA=0.72
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Archive-Number: 201004/63
X-Sequence-Number: 5462

On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote=
:
> Instead of doing this, could we just change the logic in InitPostgres?
>
> Current logic says we hit the connection limit if:
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0if (!am_superuser &&
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0ReservedBackends > 0 &&
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0!HaveNFreeProcs(ReservedBackends))
>
> Couldn't we just change this to:
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0if ((!am_superuser || am_walsender) &&
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0ReservedBackends > 0 &&
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0!HaveNFreeProcs(ReservedBackends))
>
> Seems like that'd be a whole lot simpler, if it'll do the job...

It's very simple, but prevents superuser replication connection
from being established when connection limit exceeds for
non-superusers. It seems strange to me that superuser cannot use
superuser_reserved_connections slots. If we'd like to forbid
replication connection to use the slots, I think that we should
just get rid of a superuser privilege from it instead.

Regards,

--=20
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center