> 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?
We can certainly maintain a flag in the shared state that is set once the first backend loads all the tranches in shared memory. That did not cross my mind, but it feels wrong to offload such responsibility to a normal backend. > Also, is there any chance that postmaster might need to access the > tranche names? A postmaster does not currently have a reason to lookup a tranche name, afaict. This only occurs when looking up wait events or if lwlock tracing is enabled. -- Sami
