Re: putting a bgworker to rest
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: putting a bgworker to rest |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoapsJTask11K_wx4vMF2yZyagKS8OOXdDcQhCKaKEEF2A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: putting a bgworker to rest (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> So a "done" worker would never be restarted, until postmaster sees a >> crash or is itself restarted? I guess that'd be useful for workers >> running during recovery, which terminate when recovery completes. Is >> that your use case? > > Well, its not actual postgres recovery, but something similar in the > context of logical replication. It's probably too late to be twiddling this very much more, but another thing I think would be useful is for backends to have the ability to request that the postmaster start a worker of type xyz, rather than having the server start it automatically at startup time. That's what you'd need for parallel query, and there might be some replication-related use cases for such things as well. The general usage pattern would be: - regular backend realizes that it needs help - kicks postmaster to start a helper process - helper process runs for a while, doing work - helper process finishes work, maybe waits around for some period of time to see if any new work arrives, and then exits - eventually go back to step 1 -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: