Re: Autovacuum in the backend

"Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>
> Yeah --- a libpq-based solution is not what I think of as integrated at
> all, because it cannot do anything that couldn't be done by the existing
> external autovacuum process.  About all you can buy there is having the
> postmaster spawn the autovacuum process, which is slightly more
> convenient to use but doesn't buy any real new functionality.
>

One reason of not using lib-pq is that this one has to wait for the
completion of each vacuum (we don't has async execution in libpq right?),
but by signaling does not.

But by signaling, we have to detect that if the forked backend successfully
done its job. I am not sure how to easily incorporate this into current
signaling framework.

Regards,
Qingqing