On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 4:45 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I wrote: > > Hmmm ... maybe that should be more like > > if (smartShutState != SMART_NORMAL_USAGE && > > backend_type == BACKEND_TYPE_NORMAL) > > After some more rethinking and testing, here's a v5 that feels > fairly final to me. I realized that the logic in canAcceptConnections > was kind of backwards: it's better to check the main pmState restrictions > first and then the smart-shutdown restrictions afterwards.
LGTM. I tested this a bit today and it did what I expected for parallel queries and vacuum, on primary and standby. > I'm assuming we want to back-patch this as far as 9.6, where parallel > query began to be a thing. Yeah. I mean, it's more radical than what I thought we'd be doing for this, but you could get into real trouble by running in smart shutdown mode without the autovac infrastructure alive.
