| From: | "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: parallelizing the archiver |
| Date: | 2021-10-25 17:48:34 |
| Message-ID: | AEB31F5E-6387-4172-BA71-C0F97B95DCBA@amazon.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/25/21, 10:18 AM, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 1:14 PM Bossart, Nathan <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> wrote:
>> IIUC this would mean that archive modules that need to define GUCs or
>> register background workers would have to separately define a
>> _PG_init() and be loaded via shared_preload_libraries in addition to
>> archive_library. That doesn't seem too terrible to me, but it was
>> something I was trying to avoid.
>
> Hmm. That doesn't seem like a terrible goal, but I think we should try
> to find some way of achieving it that looks tidier than this does.
We could just treat archive_library as if it is tacked onto the
shared_preload_libraries list. I think I can make that look
relatively tidy.
Nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2021-10-25 17:50:28 | Re: Experimenting with hash tables inside pg_dump |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2021-10-25 17:43:18 | Re: Predefined role pg_maintenance for VACUUM, ANALYZE, CHECKPOINT. |