{"push_id":2387345899,"size":2,"distinct_size":2,"ref":"refs/heads/master","head":"6a0b30f0401a76b3a972e366ba30aa7e49ffbf87","before":"f9f8784c8b3050aaec52da88a6e41b3e3f576b96","commits":[{"sha":"4e0c743c18bf5435a4850510c5c74b3521c3e1e5","author":{"name":"Tom Lane","email":"9ca635a44fdf5aa326758d8d245579b9ae84653c@sss.pgh.pa.us"},"message":"Fix cross-checking of ReservedBackends/max_wal_senders/MaxConnections.\n\nWe were independently checking ReservedBackends < MaxConnections and\nmax_wal_senders < MaxConnections, but because walsenders aren't allowed\nto use superuser-reserved connections, that's really the wrong thing.\nCorrect behavior is to insist on ReservedBackends + max_wal_senders being\nless than MaxConnections.  Fix the code and associated documentation.\n\nThis has been wrong for a long time, but since the situation probably\nhardly ever arises in the field (especially pre-v10, when the default\nfor max_wal_senders was zero), no back-patch.\n\nDiscussion: https://postgr.es/m/28271.1520195491@sss.pgh.pa.us","distinct":true,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/postgres/postgres/commits/4e0c743c18bf5435a4850510c5c74b3521c3e1e5"},{"sha":"6a0b30f0401a76b3a972e366ba30aa7e49ffbf87","author":{"name":"Tom Lane","email":"9ca635a44fdf5aa326758d8d245579b9ae84653c@sss.pgh.pa.us"},"message":"In initdb, don't bother trying max_connections = 10.\n\nThe server won't actually start with that setting anymore, not since\nwe raised the default max_wal_senders to 10.  Per discussion, we don't\nwish to back down on that default, so instead raise the effective floor\nfor max_connections (to 20).  It's still possible to configure a smaller\nsetting manually, but initdb won't set it that way.\n\nSince that change happened in v10, back-patch to v10.\n\nKyotaro Horiguchi\n\nDiscussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180209.170823.42008365.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp","distinct":true,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/postgres/postgres/commits/6a0b30f0401a76b3a972e366ba30aa7e49ffbf87"}]}
{"actor":{"display_login":"postgres-mirror"}}