Re: worker_spi example BGW code GUC tweak - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: worker_spi example BGW code GUC tweak
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmob74JYb0d0+WayhvH1RKqVyP2BvMgHpJopjgWStYxPzEA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to worker_spi example BGW code GUC tweak  (Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>)
Responses Re: worker_spi example BGW code GUC tweak  (Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net> wrote:
> Would this sample code make an even better teaching example if it
> used the existing GUC way to declare that worker_spi.naptime is
> in units of seconds?
>
> Or does it not do that for some reason I've overlooked?

Making it use GUC_UNIT_S seems like a good idea to me, but removing
the mention of seconds from the description doesn't seem like a good
idea to me.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_(total_)relation_size and partitioned tables
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: es_query_dsa is broken