From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Artur Litwinowicz <admin(at)ybka(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: elegant and effective way for running jobs inside a database |
Date: | 2012-03-11 18:51:21 |
Message-ID: | m2aa3moqri.fsf@hi-media.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I don't want to have a server-side ticker at all, especially not one
> that exists only for a client that might or might not be there. We've
> been doing what we can to reduce PG's idle-power consumption, which is
> an important consideration for large-data-center applications. Adding a
> new source of periodic wakeups is exactly the wrong direction to be
> going.
I would guess that's an opt-in solution, as some other of our subprocess
are, much like autovacuum.
> There is no need for a ticker to drive a job system. It should be able
> to respond to interrupts (if a NOTIFY comes in) and otherwise sleep
> until the precalculated time that it next needs to launch a job.
I think the ticker was proposed as a minimal component allowing to be
developing the job system as an extension.
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Cédric Villemain | 2012-03-11 19:23:40 | Re: pg_prewarm |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-03-11 16:00:47 | Re: NULL's support in SP-GiST |