Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> One of the uses for bgworkers that don't have shmem connection is to
>> have them use libpq connections instead. I don't really see the point
>> of forcing everyone to use backend connections when libpq connections
>> are enough. In particular, they are easier to port from existing code;
>> and they make it easier to share code with systems that still have to
>> support older PG versions.
Exactly, I think most bgworker would just use libpq if that's available,
using a backend's infrastructure is not that good a fit here. I mean,
connect from your worker to a database using libpq and call a backend's
function (provided by the same extension I guess) in there.
That's how I think pgqd would get integrated into the worker
infrastructure, right?
> They also can get away with a lot more crazy stuff without corrupting
> the database. You better know something about what youre doing before
> doing something with direct shared memory access.
And there's a whole lot you can already do just with a C coded stored
procedure already.
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support