On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 01:34:15PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-07-28 13:45:29 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Having each bgworker on its own schema would be enough to prevent
>> conflicts, but I'd like to add a second thing: a check on
>> pg_stat_activity.wait_event after starting the workers. I have added
>> something like that in the patch I have posted today for the custom
>> wait events at [1] and it enforces the startup sequences of the
>> workers in a stricter way.
>
> Is that very meaningful? ISTM the interesting thing to check for would be that
> the state is idle?
That's interesting for the sake of the other patch to check that the
custom events are reported. Anyway, I am a bit short in time, so I
have applied the simplest fix where the dynamic workers just use a
different base ID to get out of your way.
--
Michael