Re: HaveNFreeProcs ?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: HaveNFreeProcs ?
Дата
Msg-id 631.1119500318@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на HaveNFreeProcs ?  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@surnet.cl>)
Ответы Re: HaveNFreeProcs ?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: HaveNFreeProcs ?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@surnet.cl> writes:
> I just noticed the HaveNFreeProcs routine is coded as a loop around the
> ProcGlobal struct members.  I wonder if it's possible to use a simple
> check in procArray->numBackends against procArray->maxBackends instead?

It used to look like that, but now that numBackends includes prepared
transactions that's no longer a useful test.  I think that the existing
coding is OK, because it's written to not loop more than
superuser_reserved_connections times, and it's hard to imagine anyone
would set that to more than half a dozen or so.

Also, that routine will disappear entirely if we agree to remove
commit_siblings (see nearby thread), so right at the moment I'm not very
concerned about improving it.  If it is still there forty-eight hours
from now, let's talk about it then.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Gavin Sherry
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PATCHES] O_DIRECT for WAL writes
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: HaveNFreeProcs ?