Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> writes: > Simon, > * Simon Riggs (si...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: >> I admire your forward thinking on that; yes, that could cause >> problems. But even then, we would be admitting that nobody now gets a >> valid value of MaxBackends, which sounds like it might be a problem in >> itself.
> I agree that the current implementation could lead to problems/confusion > for contrib module authors, if they're doing something with MaxBackends. This is more or less a necessary consequence of the fact that _init functions are now allowed to add background workers. If there is any code today that expects MaxBackends to be correct at preload_shared_libraries time, it's already been broken irretrievably by the bgworkers patch; and we'd be well advised to make that breakage obvious not subtle. So I'm +1 for Heikki's proposal as well. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers