Re: parallelizing the archiver - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bossart, Nathan
Subject Re: parallelizing the archiver
Date
Msg-id F0DC2149-1A41-4F14-B471-08E4BDD711F7@amazon.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: parallelizing the archiver  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Responses Re: parallelizing the archiver
List pgsql-hackers
On 10/4/21, 8:19 PM, "Stephen Frost" <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> It's also been discussed, at least around the water cooler (as it were
> in pandemic times- aka our internal slack channels..) that the existing
> archive command might be reimplemented as an extension using these.  Not
> sure if that's really necessary but it was a thought.  In any case,
> thanks for working on this!

Interesting.  I like the idea of having one code path for everything
instead of branching for the hook and non-hook paths.  Thanks for
sharing your thoughts.

Nathan


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations
Next
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] document