> The thing is, when dealing with new features, we reduce our overall > maintenance burden if we get it right the first time. Obviously it's > too late for major changes, but minor adjustments to maintain the POLA > seem like exactly what we SHOULD be doing right now.
Oh, I agree. Since we have a separate WALSender limit, it seems counter-intuitive and difficult-to-admin to have the WALSenders also limited by superuser_connections. They should be their own separate connection pool, just like the other "background" processes. However, if this was somehow infeasible, it wouldn't be hard to document. That's all. -- -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://www.pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers