Re: Review: Extra Daemons / bgworker - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: Review: Extra Daemons / bgworker
Date
Msg-id 20121203154445.GF5276@alvh.no-ip.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Review: Extra Daemons / bgworker  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Review: Extra Daemons / bgworker  (Markus Wanner <markus@bluegap.ch>)
List pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 3 December 2012 15:17, Markus Wanner <markus@bluegap.ch> wrote:

> > The only process that currently starts background workers ... ehm ...
> > autovacuum workers is the autovacuum launcher. It uses the above
> > Postmaster Signal in autovacuum.c:do_start_autovacuum_worker() to have
> > the postmaster launch bg/autovac workers on demand.
>
> My understanding was that the patch keep autovac workers and
> background workers separate at this point.

That is correct.

> Is there anything to be gained *now* from merging those two concepts?
> I saw that as refactoring that can occur once we are happy it should
> take place, but isn't necessary.

IMO it's a net loss in robustness of the autovac implementation.

--
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Review: Extra Daemons / bgworker
Next
From: Markus Wanner
Date:
Subject: Re: Review: Extra Daemons / bgworker