Re: parallelizing the archiver

On 10/25/21, 10:50 AM, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> wrote:
> On 10/25/21, 10:18 AM, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 1:14 PM Bossart, Nathan <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> wrote:
>>> IIUC this would mean that archive modules that need to define GUCs or
>>> register background workers would have to separately define a
>>> _PG_init() and be loaded via shared_preload_libraries in addition to
>>> archive_library. That doesn't seem too terrible to me, but it was
>>> something I was trying to avoid.
>>
>> Hmm. That doesn't seem like a terrible goal, but I think we should try
>> to find some way of achieving it that looks tidier than this does.
>
> We could just treat archive_library as if it is tacked onto the
> shared_preload_libraries list. I think I can make that look
> relatively tidy.

Alright, here is an attempt at that. With this revision, archive
libraries are preloaded (and _PG_init() is called), and the archiver
is responsible for calling _PG_archive_module_init() to get the
callbacks. I've also removed the GUC check hooks as previously
discussed.

Nathan