Re: Upgrading rant.
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Upgrading rant. |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 6281.1041741479@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Upgrading rant. (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Upgrading rant.
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> That's a good kluge, but still a kluge: it doesn't completely guarantee
>> that no one else connects while pg_upgrade is trying to do its thing.
> I was thinking about using GUC:
> #max_connections = 32
> #superuser_reserved_connections = 2
> Set both of those to 1, and you lock out everyone but the super-user.
You're missing the point: I don't want to lock out everyone but the
super-user, I want to lock out everyone, period. Superusers are just
as likely to screw up pg_upgrade as anyone else.
BTW:
$ postmaster -N 1 -c superuser_reserved_connections=1
postmaster: superuser_reserved_connections must be less than max_connections.
$
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: