Tom Lane wrote:
>"Matthew T. O'Connor" <matthew@zeut.net> writes:
>
>
>>In the windows service world, is there any reason pg_autovacuum should
>>ever give up?
>>
>>
>
>I was a bit worried about the scenario in which J Random Luser tries to
>start the server twice and ends up with two autovacuum daemons attached
>to the same postmaster. I'm not sure if this is possible, probable,
>or dangerous ... but it seems like a point to consider.
>
It is a good point to consider. Let me be a little more detailed in my
explanation and see if that helps:
* A never give up pg_autovacuum would only be used when run as a windows
service.
* The windows service control manager can still kill pg_autovacuum, so
you shouldn't be able to start more than one that way.
* You have always been able to run multiple pg_autovacuums, it's not
advisable, and it's only bad side effect would be excessive, or more
than expected, vacuum commands.
