RE: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE
| От | Aya Iwata (Fujitsu) |
|---|---|
| Тема | RE: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | OS7PR01MB119645F36D5D4680189EA653EEAD4A@OS7PR01MB11964.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | RE: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE ("Aya Iwata (Fujitsu)" <iwata.aya@fujitsu.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Perhaps you haven't seen my previous post. > > FWIW, while reading this code, I was wondering about one improvement > > that could show benefits for more extension code than only what we are > > discussing here because external code has no access to > > BackgroundWorkerSlot while holding the LWLock BackgroundWorkerLock in > > a single loop, by rewriting this new routine with something like that: > > void TerminateBackgroundWorkerMatchin( > > bool (*do_terminate) (int pid, BackgroundWorker *, Datum)) > > > > Then the per-database termination would be a custom routine, defined > > also in bgworker.c. Other extension code could define their own > > filtering callback routine. Just an idea in passing, to let extension > > code take more actions on bgworker slots in use-based on a PGPROC > > entry, like a role ID for example, or it could be a different factor. > > Feel free to dislike such a funky idea if you do not like it and say > > so, of course. > > Thank you for your advice. > I'd like to address that, but I couldn't figure out how to do it on my own. > Could you please describe it more? I'd like to adapt the patch for this, so could you tell me with the details? Regards, Aya Iwata Fujitsu Limited
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: