Re: bg worker: patch 1 of 6 - permanent process

From: Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: bg worker: patch 1 of 6 - permanent process
Date: 2010-08-26 03:01:00
Message-ID: AANLkTi=_U0LwoPxJxr+ncbv9K+54wjE8vMUM6VaYATN2@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 11:31 PM, Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> wrote:
>>> This patch turns the existing autovacuum launcher into an always running
>>> process, partly called the coordinator.
>
> It's not clear to me whether it's better to have a single coordinator
> process that handles both autovacuum and other things, or whether it's
> better to have two separate processes.

Ah, we can separate the proposal to two topics:
A. Support to run non-vacuum jobs from autovacuum launcher
B. Support "user defined background processes"

A was proposed in the original "1 of 6" patch, but B might be more general.
If we have a separated coordinator, B will be required.

Markus, do you need B? Or A + standard backend processes are enough?
If you need B eventually, starting with B might be better.

--
Itagaki Takahiro

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2010-08-26 03:34:30 Packaging of PG 9.0RC1
Previous Message A.M. 2010-08-26 02:48:20 Re: Committers info for the git migration - URGENT!