Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start

On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 8:37 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>> 3. Go ahead with converting the postmaster to use WaitEventSet, a la
>> the draft patch I posted earlier.  I'd be happy to do this if we were
>> at the start of a devel cycle, but right now seems a bit late --- not
>> to mention that we really need to fix 9.6 as well.
>
> Yea, backpatching this to 9.6 seems like a bigger hammer than
> appropriate.  I'm on the fence WRT master, I think there's an argument
> to be made that this is going to become a bigger and bigger problem, and
> that we'll wish in a year or two that we had fewer releases with
> parallelism etc that don't use WaitEventSets.

I think changing this might be wise.  This problem isn't going away
for real until we do this, right?

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