| From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) |
| Date: | 2010-02-22 21:35:07 |
| Message-ID: | b42b73151002221335g21109399vfb3fb7abe005ed9d@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I still haven't seen a good reason for not using cron or Task Scheduler
> or other standard tools.
*) provided and popular feature in higher end databases
*) the audience you cater to expects it
*) IMO, it should simply not be necessary to incorporate a secondary
scripting environment to do things like vacuum and backups
*) portable. for example, you can dump a database on linux and restore
to windows without re-implementing your scheduler/scripts
as a consequence,
*) off the shelf utilities/pgfoundry projects, etc can rely and
utilize scheduling behavior
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-02-22 21:37:20 | Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) |
| Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2010-02-22 21:18:33 | Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) |