| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrey Borodin <amborodin(at)acm(dot)org>, amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: background sessions |
| Date: | 2017-01-10 15:58:45 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ64384YKfpaMTAuawN4Ke3ZDHEC11widN=Y=usDemeow@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 5:18 PM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> For additional entertainment, I include patches that integrate
> background sessions into dblink. So dblink can open a connection to a
> background session, and then you can use the existing dblink functions
> to send queries, read results, etc. People use dblink to make
> self-connections to get autonomous subsessions, so this would directly
> address that use case. The 0001 patch is some prerequisite refactoring
> to remove an ugly macro mess, which is useful independent of this. 0002
> is the actual patch.
Would that constitute a complete replacement for pg_background?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2017-01-10 16:02:02 | Re: RustgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-01-10 15:58:08 | Re: [HACKERS] Questionable tag usage |