On 1/19/23 2:44 AM, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 02:51:38PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> Should (nfree < SuperuserReservedBackends) be using <=, or am I confused? > I believe < is correct. At this point, the new backend will have already > claimed a proc struct, so if the number of remaining free slots equals the > number of reserved slots, it is okay. > >> What's the deal with removing "and no new replication connections will >> be accepted" from the documentation? Is the existing documentation >> just wrong? If so, should we fix that first? And maybe delete >> "non-replication" from the error message that says "remaining >> connection slots are reserved for non-replication superuser >> connections"? It seems like right now the comments say that >> replication connections are a completely separate pool of connections, >> but the documentation and the error message make it sound otherwise. >> If that's true, then one of them is wrong, and I think it's the >> docs/error message. Or am I just misreading it? > I think you are right. This seems to have been missed in ea92368. I moved > this part to a new patch that should probably be back-patched to v12. > > On that note, I wonder if it's worth changing the "sorry, too many clients > already" message to make it clear that max_connections has been reached. > IME some users are confused by this error, and I think it would be less > confusing if it pointed to the parameter that governs the number of > connection slots. I'll create a new thread for this. > There is one typo , for the doc changes, it is mentioned "pg_use_reserved_backends" but i think it supposed to be "pg_use_reserved_connections" under Table 22.1. Predefined Roles.
and in the error message too
[edb@centos7tushar bin]$ ./psql postgres -U r2
psql: error: connection to server on socket "/tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432" failed: FATAL:remaining connection slots are reserved for roles with privileges of pg_use_reserved_backends
