Re: max_connections documentation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: max_connections documentation
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1J5DuB-zHufzF+kHCdaPop4sHH4jG0h9GSq94ECGr98bQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to max_connections documentation  (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>)
Responses Re: max_connections documentation
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 6:20 AM, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com> wrote:
>
> I'm surprised to see that the docs make no mention of how max_connections, max_worker_processes and autovacuum_max_workers (don't) relate. I couldn't remember and had to actually look at the code. I'd like to clarify this in the max_connecitons section of the documents by doing s/connections/user connections/ and including the formula for MaxBackends (MaxBackends = MaxConnections + autovacuum_max_workers + 1 + max_worker_processes). I'll also mention that any postgres_fdw connections are considered user connections.
>

I think it makes sense to add such a clarification in docs, however
not sure if specifying along with max_connections parameter is
good idea as the formula is somewhat internal and is not directly
related to max_connections.  How about specifying in below page:


>
> Also, my understanding is that the parallel stuff will continue to fall under max_worker_processes?

Yes.

With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel Seq Scan
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Compression of full-page-writes