Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com> writes:
> Ah, I missed the problem with postmaster. Could we have the first backend
> that needs to access the table be responsible for creating it and
> populating it with the built-in/requested-at-startup entries? Also, is
> there any chance that postmaster might need to access the tranche names?
Seems quite hazardous to let the postmaster get involved with such
a data structure. If it seems to need to, we'd better rethink
where to put the functionality that needs the access.
regards, tom lane
