From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Masahiro Ikeda <ikedamsh(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Support worker_spi to execute the function dynamically. |
Date: | 2023-07-21 06:24:19 |
Message-ID: | ZLokkzw6pmvDU9bM@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 11:24:08AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> Okay. Here's a quick patch for adding TAP tests to the worker_spi
> module. We can change it to taste.
What do you think if we removed completely the sql/ test, moving it to
TAP so as we have only one cluster set up when running a make check?
worker_spi.sql only does two waits (one for the initialization and one
to check that the tuple has been processed), so these could be
replaced by some poll_query_until()?
As we have a dynamic.conf, installcheck is not supported so we don't
use anything with this switch. Besides, updating
shared_preload_libraries and restarting the node in TAP is cheaper
than a second initdb.
- snprintf(worker.bgw_name, BGW_MAXLEN, "worker_spi worker %d", i);
- snprintf(worker.bgw_type, BGW_MAXLEN, "worker_spi");
+ snprintf(worker.bgw_name, BGW_MAXLEN, "worker_spi static worker %d", i);
+ snprintf(worker.bgw_type, BGW_MAXLEN, "worker_spi static worker");
[..]
- snprintf(worker.bgw_name, BGW_MAXLEN, "worker_spi worker %d", i);
- snprintf(worker.bgw_type, BGW_MAXLEN, "worker_spi");
+ snprintf(worker.bgw_name, BGW_MAXLEN, "worker_spi dynamic worker %d", i);
+ snprintf(worker.bgw_type, BGW_MAXLEN, "worker_spi dynamic worker");
Good idea to split that.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-07-21 06:26:22 | Re: table_open/table_close with different lock mode |
Previous Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2023-07-21 06:19:54 | Re: MERGE ... RETURNING |