On Sat, 29 May 2004, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-05-29 at 11:04, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
>>> It is supposed to be linked into the postmaster and forked from there.
>>
>> In the current state of pg_autovacuum it wouldn't matter a lot, but
>> I am assuming that we will soon migrate it to depend on being part of
>> the postmaster environment. For instance, it ought to be configured
>> from GUC, which will mean it has to receive SIGHUP from the postmaster.
>> In an only slightly longer timeframe, it will probably want access to
>> shared memory so it can look at stats maintained in the FSM. These
>> attributes would make it quite inappropriate for autovacuum to live in
>> src/bin.
>
> Ok.
>
>> BTW, Matthew, I am currently working on promoting the bgwriter into a
>> more full-fledged postmaster child. If you can wait a day or so you
>> should have a decent model to work from. I'll try to commit as soon
>> as a working skeleton is in place.
>
> I can wait, but I am really trying not to miss the feature freeze which
> AFAIK, is still happening in a few days. Is that changing? Will I have
> time if I wait a few days? Especially given that my backend hacking
> skill leave much to be desired.
We're discussing it in core right now, but Tom's feel is that we can have
PITR if we wait the extra month, which will also give a bit more time to
hammer out any bugs in Win32 ... so figure on having the extra 4 weeks to
work with ...
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664