Re: group locking: incomplete patch, just for discussion - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim Nasby
Subject Re: group locking: incomplete patch, just for discussion
Date
Msg-id 54502518.8060401@BlueTreble.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: group locking: incomplete patch, just for discussion  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: group locking: incomplete patch, just for discussion
List pgsql-hackers
On 10/28/14, 3:48 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Given your description of pg_background it looks an awful lot like
> infrastructure to make Autonomous Transactions work, but it doesn't
> even do that. I guess it could do in a very small additional patch, so
> maybe it is useful for something.

What do you see as being missing for autonomous transactios?

BTW, what I think would make this feature VERY useful is if it provided the ability to fire something up in another
backendand leave it running in the background. I think you can do that with FDW, but then you have the authentication
PITAto deal with (and perhaps pg_background is a more efficient way to move data between backends than FDW, but that's
justa guess...)
 
-- 
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: Trailing comma support in SELECT statements
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: group locking: incomplete patch, just for discussion