From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Let's start talking features and "theme" for 9.4 |
Date: | 2014-05-02 09:10:58 |
Message-ID: | CAFj8pRA8+J17PxmmL1B8b-4bfbHvpQPcp7g7rG7Skune=BuY8Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
2014-05-02 10:56 GMT+02:00 Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>:
> On Fri, 2014-05-02 at 08:36 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 4:39 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > > but I am looking for, so in early next versions some interesting
> bgworkers
> > > will be in core - scheduler, idle connection killer, multi CPU sorter,
> ...
> > -1 for that. Those bgworkers things satisfy very specific needs (I
> > implemented one of them in the list). I'd rather see a wiki page
> > listing them properly and let each implementer maintain their code.
> >
>
> Completely agree with Michael. I see them just like FDWs. We don't add
> some FDW in the core. Some are contrib modules, some are available
> elsewhere. BgWorkers should be handled the same way.
>
When I spoke "core" - I though a "contrib" resp. upstream
Pavel
>
> > > So I am thinking, it should be marked as "other" feature this year.
> > +1 for that. Dynamic background workers is a hacker feature.
>
> +1
>
>
> --
> Guillaume
> http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info
> http://www.dalibo.com
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Guillaume Lelarge | 2014-05-02 09:35:36 | Re: Let's start talking features and "theme" for 9.4 |
Previous Message | Guillaume Lelarge | 2014-05-02 08:56:28 | Re: Let's start talking features and "theme" for 9.4 |