Simon Riggs wrote: > On 3 December 2012 15:17, Markus Wanner <mar...@bluegap.ch> wrote:
> > The only process that currently starts background workers ... ehm ... > > autovacuum workers is the autovacuum launcher. It uses the above > > Postmaster Signal in autovacuum.c:do_start_autovacuum_worker() to have > > the postmaster launch bg/autovac workers on demand. > > My understanding was that the patch keep autovac workers and > background workers separate at this point. That is correct. > Is there anything to be gained *now* from merging those two concepts? > I saw that as refactoring that can occur once we are happy it should > take place, but isn't necessary. IMO it's a net loss in robustness of the autovac implementation. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
