On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Tatsuo Ishii <is...@postgresql.org> writes: >> I think this is because pg_control on the standby remembers that the >> previous primary server's max_connections = 1100 even if the standby >> server fails to start. Shouldn't we update pg_control file only when >> standby succeeds to start? > > Somebody refresh my memory as to why we have this restriction (that is, > slave's max_connections >= master's max_connections) in the first place? > Seems like it should not be a necessary requirement, and working towards > getting rid of it would be far better than any other answer.
If I recall correctly, that's because KnownAssignedXIDs and the lock table need to be large enough on the standby for the largest snapshot possible (procarray.c). -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
