Re: Allow workers to override datallowconn - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Allow workers to override datallowconn
Date
Msg-id 31080.1519329623@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Allow workers to override datallowconn  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 8:26 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>> What's the argument against?

> Complexity for the bgw usecase.

They'd be completely different implementations and code paths, no?

For pg_upgrade to use such a thing it'd need to be a connection parameter
of some sort (implying, eg, infrastructure in libpq), while for a bgworker
there's no such animal as connection parameters because there's no
connection.

Certainly what pg_upgrade has to do is a bit ugly, but you'd be adding
an awful lot of code to get rid of a small amount of code.  Doesn't
seem like a great tradeoff.  Even if it is a good tradeoff, it seems
entirely unrelated to the bgworker's problem.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Online enabling of checksums
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Allow workers to override datallowconn