Excerpts from Daniel Farina's message of jue may 03 17:04:03 -0400 2012: > On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Possibly. I have some fear of ending up with too many background > > processes, but we may need them. > > I sort of care about this, but only on systems that are not very busy > and could otherwise get by with fewer resources -- for example, it'd > be nice to turn off autovacuum and the stat collector if it really > doesn't have to be around. Perhaps a Nap Commander[0] process or > procedure (if baked into postmaster, to optimize to one process from > two) would do the trick?
I'm not sure I see the point in worrying about this at all. I mean, a process doing nothing does not waste much resources, does it? Other than keeping a PID that you can't use for other stuff. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
