Re: [DOCS] max_worker_processes on the standby

2015-10-02 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: >> The standby can have the feature enabled even though the master has it >> disabled? That seems like it can only lead to heartache. > > Can you elaborate? Sort of. Our rule up until now has always been that the standby

Re: [DOCS] max_worker_processes on the standby

2015-10-02 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Robert Haas wrote: > The standby can have the feature enabled even though the master has it > disabled? That seems like it can only lead to heartache. Can you elaborate? -- Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Se

Re: [DOCS] max_worker_processes on the standby

2015-10-02 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Fujii Masao wrote: > >> What happens if pg_xact_commit_timestamp() is called in standby after >> track_commit_timestamp is disabled in master, DeactivateCommitTs() is >> called and all commit_ts files are removed in standby? I tried that cas

Re: [DOCS] max_worker_processes on the standby

2015-10-02 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Fujii Masao wrote: > What happens if pg_xact_commit_timestamp() is called in standby after > track_commit_timestamp is disabled in master, DeactivateCommitTs() is > called and all commit_ts files are removed in standby? I tried that case > and got the following assertion failure. Ah. So the stan