| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Logical Replication WIP |
| Date: | 2016-08-09 08:18:42 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqTyEE7KhgP1ZfGoVeVGpVSRcNMavcF6BaBjaQ=6SjnMdg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 5:13 PM, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 9 August 2016 at 15:59, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> The logical replication launcher process and the apply process are
>> implemented as a bgworker. Isn't better to have them as an auxiliary
>> process like checkpointer, wal writer?
>
> I don't think so. The checkpointer, walwriter, autovacuum, etc predate
> bgworkers. I strongly suspect that if they were to be implemented now they'd
> use bgworkers.
+1. We could always get them now under the umbrella of the bgworker
infrastructure if this cleans up some code duplication.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2016-08-09 08:34:53 | Small issues in syncrep.c |
| Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2016-08-09 08:13:08 | Re: Logical Replication WIP |