Josh Berkus wrote:
> Dave,
>
>
>>In previous discussions on -hackers when ppl raised the idea of
>>something like pgAgent being built into the backend, istm that the
>>majority of people were against the idea.
>
>
> Well, you're up against the minimalist approach to core PostgreSQL there. It
> would pretty much *have* to be an optional add-in, even if it was stored in
> pg_catalog. I can see a lot of uses for a back-end job scheduler myself, but
> it would need to go through the gauntlet of design criticism first <wry
> grin>.
You want to scare me, don't you? :-)
We're having a growing zoo of daemons that can be regarded as tightly
integrated server add-on processes (slony, autovac, pgAgent), and it
would be really nice (say: win32 users are used to it, thus requiring
it) to have a single point of control.
Maybe a super daemon (in win32 probably pg_ctl), controlling postmaster
and all those helper processes (accessible through pgsql functions, of
course) would be the solition. This keeps the kernel clean, separates
backend shmem from helper processes and enables control over all processes.
Regards,
Andreas
