From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>, kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Review: Extra Daemons / bgworker |
Date: | 2012-12-05 22:03:44 |
Message-ID: | 20121205220344.GH4673@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 5 December 2012 15:09, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > Here's a first attempt at a new documentation chapter. This goes in
> > part "Server Programming", just after the SPI chapter.
> >
> > I just noticed that worker_spi could use some more sample code, for
> > example auth_counter was getting its own LWLock and also its own shmem
> > area, which would be helpful to demonstrate I think.
>
> "to run once" -> "to run when"
Thanks.
> Prefer
> BgWorkerStart_ConsistentState to be renamed to BgWorkerRun_InHotStandby
> BgWorkerStart_RecoveryFinished to be renamed to BgWorkerRun_InNormalMode
>
> presumably a process will shutdown if (BgWorkerRun_InHotStandby &&
> !BgWorkerRun_InNormalMode)
Hmm, no, I haven't considered that. You mean that a bgworker that
specifies to start at BgWorkerStart_ConsistentState will stop once
normal mode is reached? Currently they don't do that. And since we
don't have the notion that workers stop working, it wouldn't work --
postmaster would start them back up immediately.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2012-12-05 22:05:41 | Re: Fwd: question on foreign key lock |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-12-05 22:00:11 | Re: Dumping an Extension's Script |