| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Aleksandr Parfenov <a(dot)parfenov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Yugo Nagata <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] A hook for session start |
| Date: | 2017-11-19 22:56:29 |
| Message-ID: | 0008cccc-fe56-6306-b7ce-b3c533757e21@2ndQuadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/19/2017 04:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> I think this:
>> #define IsClientBackend() \
>> (MyBackendId != InvalidBackendId && \
>> !IsAutoVacuumLauncherProcess() && \
>> !IsAutoVacuumWorkerProcess() && \
>> !am_walsender && \
>> !IsBackgroundWorker)
>> probably belongs somewhere more central. Surely this isn't the only
>> place that we want to be able to run such a test?
> Hm. It also seems awfully awkward. Perhaps it's not being used anyplace
> performance-critical, but regardless of speed it seems like a modularity
> violation, in that client backends have to be explicitly aware of
> everything that isn't a "client backend".
>
> Maybe it's time to invent something corresponding to AuxProcType
> for non "aux" processes, or else to fold all types of Postgres
> processes into the same enum.
Yes, agreed, The above is pretty ugly and likely to be quite fragile.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2017-11-19 23:04:53 | Re: [HACKERS] Custom compression methods |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2017-11-19 22:33:14 | Re: [HACKERS] INSERT ON CONFLICT and partitioned tables |