Hi,
On 2023-06-07 23:39:01 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 07.06.23 23:30, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Yea, we definitely need the supervisor function in a separate
> > process. Presumably that means we need to split off some of the postmaster
> > responsibilities - e.g. I don't think it'd make sense to handle connection
> > establishment in the supervisor process. I wonder if this is something that
> > could end up being beneficial even in the process world.
>
> Something to think about perhaps ... how would that be different from using
> an existing external supervisor process like systemd or supervisord.
I think that's not really comparable. A postgres internal solution can
maintain resources like shared memory allocations, listening sockets, etc
across crash restarts. With something like systemd that's much harder to make
work well. And then there's the fact that you now need to deal with much more
drastic cross-platform behavioural differences.
Greetings,
Andres Freund