| From: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Denis Laxalde <denis(dot)laxalde(at)dalibo(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr(at)dalibo(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Disable bgworkers during servers start in pg_upgrade |
| Date: | 2021-08-26 13:38:23 |
| Message-ID: | 2CD2F784-E80C-4B0D-A038-A0D44DD4EDC4@yesql.se |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On 26 Aug 2021, at 15:09, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 03:24:33PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>> .. I still think that
>> changing bgworker_should_start_now() is a better option.
>
> I am not sure. We have a lot of pg_upgrade code that turns off things
> like autovacuum and that has worked fine:
True, but there are also conditionals on IsBinaryUpgrade for starting the
autovacuum launcher in the postmaster, so there is some precedent.
> Basically, pg_upgrade has avoided any backend changes that could be
> controlled by GUCs and I am not sure we want to start adding such
> changes for just this.
In principle I think it’s sound to try to avoid backend changes where possible
without sacrificing robustness.
--
Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2021-08-26 13:42:29 | Re: [PATCH] Disable bgworkers during servers start in pg_upgrade |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2021-08-26 13:09:45 | Re: [PATCH] Disable bgworkers during servers start in pg_upgrade |