Re: Behaviour of bgworker with SIGHUP

On Mon, 2012-12-31 at 12:54 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-12-31 at 11:03 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> 
> > > I think this (have a config option, and have SIGHUP work as expected)
> > > would be useful to demo in worker_spi, if you care to submit a patch.
> > 
> > Yeah, I would love too. Reading the code of worker_spi, we could add one
> > or three parameters: a naptime, and the schemaname for both bgprocess.
> > One would be enough or do you prefer all three?
> 
> I got no problem with three.
> 

OK, will do on wednesday.

Thanks.


-- 
Guillaume
http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info
http://www.dalibo.com