Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core)

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.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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)