On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Steve Atkins wrote: > >> Would having a higher level process manager be adequate - one >> that spawns the postmaster and a list of associated processes >> (queue manager, job scheduler, random user daemons that are >> used for database application maintenance). It sounds like >> something like that would be able to start up and shut down >> an entire family of daemons, of which the postmaster is the major >> one, gracefully. > > Sort of a super-pg_ctl, eh? Hmm, that sounds like it could work ... >
Summarizing: so we want some kind of super postmaster that starts some processes (including the postgres' postmaster itself), and track their availability. - processes that doesn't need to connect to shared memory should start here (ie: pgagent, slony daemons, pgbouncer, LISTEN applications, etc) - processes that need to connect to shared memory should be childs of postgres' postmaster is this so different from what the postgres' postmaster itself does? i mean, can we reuse that code? this project of course growth beyond my known abilities, so while i will try it (if anyone seems like he can takle it please go for it)... maybe we can add this to the TODO if seems acceptable? specially, i'd love to hear Tom's opinion on this one... -- Atentamente, Jaime Casanova Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL Asesoría y desarrollo de sistemas Guayaquil - Ecuador Cel. +59387171157 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
