Re: Backup throttling - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Backup throttling
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZQRMvxG7kZoLSxs1ruLh6Oyg3auastjQvdRetcV+C+AJw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Backup throttling  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> slightly related: we should start to reuse procLatch for walsenders
> instead of having a separate latch someday.

+1. The potential for bugs from failing to account for this within
signal handlers seems like a concern. I think that every process
should use the process latch, except for the archiver which uses a
local latch because it pointedly does not touch shared memory. I think
I wrote a comment that made it into the latch header comments
encouraging this, but never saw to it that it was universally adhered
to.


-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Review: ECPG infrastructure changes part 1, was: Re: ECPG fixes
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: ALTER TABLE ... SET TABLESPACE pg_default