Re: Redesigning parallel dump/restore's wait-for-workers logic

Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> This patch applies with a few minor offsets, compiles without
> warning, and passes all regression tests including `make
> check-world` with TAP tests enabled. This and the related patch
> dealing with the parallel API definitely make things cleaner and
> easier to follow.

OK, thanks for reviewing!

> I find it disappointing that ACLs continue to be held back as a
> fourth step outside the framework of the "normal" ordering. That
> is an ugly hack, which makes it impossible to, for example, create
> a fifth step to create indexes on materialized views and refresh
> them in anything resembling a clean fashion. Would it make sense
> to deal with the ACL ordering hack in one of these patches, or
> should that be left for later?

Seems like material for some other patch. It would be greatly more
invasive than what I have here, I fear, and probably require some
fundamental design work.

regards, tom lane