Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
that controls the datallowconn, or is it just something missed out?
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
that controls the datallowconn, or is it just something missed out?
I think it can be removed, or rather deprecated.
datconnlimit can be set to 0
If
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
that controls the datallowconn, or is it just something missed out?
I think
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
that controls the datallowconn, or is it just something missed out?
It was never intended to be a user-accessible switch, just something to
protect template0.
I don't agree with
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
that controls the datallowconn, or is it just something missed out?
It was never intended to be a user-accessible
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
that controls the datallowconn, or is it just something missed out?
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
