| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Review: Extra Daemons / bgworker |
| Date: | 2012-11-30 12:40:35 |
| Message-ID: | m2mwxzb6ws.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> writes:
> AFAICS pgqd currently uses libpq, so I think it would rather turn into
> what I call a background worker, with a connection to Postgres shared
> memory. I perfectly well see use cases (plural!) for those.
>
> What I'm questioning is the use for what I rather call "extra daemons",
> that is, additional processes started by the postmaster without a
> connection to Postgres shared memory (and thus without a database
> connection).
I totally missed the need to connect to shared memory to be able to
connect to a database and query it. Can't we just link the bgworkder
code to the client libpq library, just as plproxy is doing I believe?
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-11-30 12:50:06 | Re: Re: missing LockBuffer(buffer, BUFFER_LOCK_SHARE) in trigger.c GetTupleForTrigger? |
| Previous Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2012-11-30 12:39:49 | Re: missing LockBuffer(buffer, BUFFER_LOCK_SHARE) in trigger.c GetTupleForTrigger? |