scott.marlowe wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, Philip Warner wrote:
>
> > At 10:49 PM 18/12/2002 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >I don't think we can bump that up in a minor.
> >
> > Why not? It's a relatively serious problem with the default config.
> >
> >
> > >Should we?
> >
> > Yes.
>
> I concur. The problems of a too-low fsm setting are serious, and I can't
> see setting fsm to 1000 creating problems for anyone. That's actually
> still a pretty low number for production servers.
OK, I agree it should be bumped up, but the issue is whether to do that
in a minor release. It will increase shared memory by 36k. Is that
safe in a beta? Tom, Mr. FSM, can you comment?
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073