Philip Crotwell <crotwell@seis.sc.edu> writes:
> On a similar idea, has there been any thought to allowing regular backend
> processess to run at lower priority?
People suggest that from time to time, but it's not an easy thing to do.
The problem is priority inversion: low-priority process acquires a lock,
then some high-priority process starts to run and wants that lock.
Presto, high-priority process is now a low-priority waiter.
Detecting priority inversion situations would be difficult, and doing
anything about them would be even more difficult...
regards, tom lane