On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 12:21 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 6:52 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2019-06-20 14:20:27 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > I am not convinced that we really need to GUC-ify this. How about
> > > just bumping the value up from 2 to say 5?
> >
> > I'm no
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 6:52 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2019-06-20 14:20:27 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 9:08 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> > > Perhaps also the number of slots per backend should be dynamic, so
> > > that you have the option to increase it from the current h
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 5:00 PM David Fetter wrote:
> Is there perhaps a way to make raising max_connections not require a
> restart? There are plenty of situations out there where restarts
> aren't something that can be done on a whim.
Sure, if you want to make this take about 100x more work.
-
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 02:20:27PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 9:08 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> > It's currently set to 4, but I now think that was too cautious. It
> > tries to avoid fragmentation by ramping up slowly (that is, memory
> > allocated and in some cases committe
Hi,
On 2019-06-20 14:20:27 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 9:08 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> > Perhaps also the number of slots per backend should be dynamic, so
> > that you have the option to increase it from the current hard-coded
> > value of 2 if you don't want to increase ma
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 9:08 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> It's currently set to 4, but I now think that was too cautious. It
> tries to avoid fragmentation by ramping up slowly (that is, memory
> allocated and in some cases committed by the operating system that we
> don't turn out to need), but it's
