Re: Regarding BGworkers

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> That seems more mess than just keeping that function in postmaster.c.
>> I agree with moving the other one.
> Please find attached a patch for that can be applied on master branch.
> do_start_bgworker is renamed to StartBackgroundWorker and moved to
> bgworker.c. At the same time, bgworker_quickdie, bgworker_die and
> bgworker_sigusr1_handler are moved to bgworker.c as they are used in
> do_start_bgworker.

This particular formulation doesn't seem quite good to me, because
we'd end up with a function called StartBackgroundWorker() and another
called StartOneBackgroundWorker() doing related but different things.
Maybe we can name things a bit better?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company