| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeremy Finzel <finzelj(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Passing current_database to BackgroundWorkerInitializeConnection |
| Date: | 2018-03-30 22:37:41 |
| Message-ID: | 34B484DA-5CAA-4A99-8C91-5231F2F3383B@anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On March 30, 2018 3:16:31 PM PDT, Jeremy Finzel <finzelj(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> What do you mean with "current database"? Before you
>> BackgroundWorkerInitializeConnection() there is no such thing?
>
>
>My module is based directly off the worker_spi example. The worker is
>dynamically launched via SQL command. But in the worker_spi example,
>the
>database postgres is just hardcoded as the database in which to start
>the
>background worker process. Instead, I want to start it in the database
>in
>which I run the SQL command.
The started worker isn't associated with the original database. You can pass the database oid as an argument to the launched bgworker.
Andres
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chapman Flack | 2018-03-30 23:05:36 | Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility |
| Previous Message | Jeremy Finzel | 2018-03-30 22:16:31 | Re: Passing current_database to BackgroundWorkerInitializeConnection |