Re: Auxiliary Processes and MyAuxProc
От | Mike Palmiotto |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Auxiliary Processes and MyAuxProc |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAMN686GgzQM_HngdjeCLkwTiC2zDEP5uY04R8V_irGHRpyRVxA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Auxiliary Processes and MyAuxProc (Mike Palmiotto <mike.palmiotto@crunchydata.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Auxiliary Processes and MyAuxProc
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 1:41 PM Mike Palmiotto <mike.palmiotto@crunchydata.com> wrote: > > <snip> > > > > If memory serves, StartChildProcess already was an attempt to unify > > the treatment of postmaster children. It's possible that another > > round of unification would be productive, but I think you'll find > > that there are random small differences in requirements that'd > > make it messy. > > It kind of seemed like it, but I noticed the small differences in > requirements, which made me a bit hesitant. I'll go ahead and see what > I can do and submit the patch for consideration. I'm considering changing StartChildProcess to take a struct with data for forking/execing each different process. Each different backend type would build up the struct and then pass it on to StartChildProcess, which would handle each separately. This would ensure that the fork type is set prior to InitPostmasterChild and would provide us with the information necessary to do what we need in the InitPostmasterChild_hook. Attached is a patch to fork_process.h which shows roughly what I'm thinking. Does this seem somewhat sane as a first step? -- Mike Palmiotto Software Engineer Crunchy Data Solutions https://crunchydata.com
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: