Re: fix bgworkers in EXEC_BACKEND

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: fix bgworkers in EXEC_BACKEND
Date: 2012-12-28 06:09:41
Message-ID: 29347.1356674981@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2012-12-27 18:44:57 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> This is broken whether it's EXEC_BACKEND or not: you don't get to change
>> anything that determines the number of workers post-startup.
>> num_workers should have been declared PGC_POSTMASTER.

> Well, the problem is, a shared library can't do that
> afaics. abc.num_workers would be using custom_variable_classes (well,
> whatever its called now, that it doesn't need to be configured).

We fixed that a few years ago, no?

http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git&a=commitdiff&h=4605d1c98

If that's broken, we certainly need to fix it again. This issue exists
for any parameter that feeds into shared memory sizing, which is exactly
why we changed it back then.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2012-12-28 08:07:05 SPI API and exceptions
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2012-12-28 02:14:58 Re: Proposal: Store "timestamptz" of database creation on "pg_database"