On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 6:36 PM Bossart, Nathan <bossartn@amazon.com> wrote:
> Based on previous threads I've seen, I believe many in the community
> would like to replace archive_command entirely, but what I'm proposing
> here would build on the existing tools. I'm currently thinking of
> something a bit like autovacuum_max_workers, but the archive workers
> would be created once and would follow a competing consumers model.
To me, it seems way more beneficial to think about being able to
invoke archive_command with many files at a time instead of just one.
I think for most plausible archive commands that would be way more
efficient than what you propose here. It's *possible* that if we had
that, we'd still want this, but I'm not even convinced.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com