From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) |
Date: | 2010-02-23 16:08:16 |
Message-ID: | 20100223160815.GE3672@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Steve Atkins wrote:
> Would having a higher level process manager be adequate - one
> that spawns the postmaster and a list of associated processes
> (queue manager, job scheduler, random user daemons that are
> used for database application maintenance). It sounds like
> something like that would be able to start up and shut down
> an entire family of daemons, of which the postmaster is the major
> one, gracefully.
Sort of a super-pg_ctl, eh? Hmm, that sounds like it could work ...
> It could also be developed almost independently of core code,
> at most it might benefit from a way for the postmaster to tell it
> when it's started up successfully.
Right -- pg_ping pops up again ...
I think it'd also want to be signalled when postmaster undergoes a
restart cycle, so that it can handle the other daemons appropriately.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-02-23 16:08:43 | Re: function side effects |
Previous Message | Steve Atkins | 2010-02-23 16:02:04 | Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) |