| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: EXEC_BACKEND vs bgworkers without BGWORKER_SHMEM_ACCESS |
| Date: | 2021-08-10 06:35:35 |
| Message-ID: | YRIeN30LB8e8d2hC@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 11:07:14AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 8:02 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I think doing nothing is fine. Given the lack of complaints, we're
>> more likely to break something than fix anything useful.
>
> +1.
FWIW, the only interesting case I have in my plugin box for a
background worker that does not attach to shared memory is a template
of worker able to catch signals, to be used as a base for simple
actions. So that's not really interesting. Making the SHMEM flag be
something mandatory on HEAD while doing nothing in the back-branches
sounds good to me, so +1.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-08-10 07:03:18 | Re: fix DECLARE tab completion |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-08-10 06:29:26 | Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side |