Re: Proposal - asynchronous functions

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Markus Wanner" <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Sim Zacks" <sim(at)compulab(dot)co(dot)il>,<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal - asynchronous functions
Date: 2011-04-26 21:09:25
Message-ID: 4DB6EE35020000250003CEAE@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> wrote:
> On 04/26/2011 02:25 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> We've talked about a number of features that could benefit from
>> some kind of "worker process" facility (e.g. logical replication,
>> parallel query). So far no one has stepped forward to build such
>> a facility, and I think without that this can't even get off the
>> ground.
>
> Remember the bgworker patches extracted from Postgres-R?

Yeah, that crossed my mind.

> [ Interestingly enough, one of the complaints I heard back then
> (not necessarily from you) was that there's no user for bgworkers,
> yet. Smells a lot like a chicken and egg problem to me. ]

My recollection is that people wanted two or three solid use cases
so that what was implemented could be shown to be generalized.
Perhaps this brings us to critical mass to re-introduce the idea.

-Kevin

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Noah Misch 2011-04-26 21:11:10 Re: XML with invalid chars
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2011-04-26 21:05:03 Re: SR standby hangs