On 9 August 2016 at 17:28, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Sure, you can go deeper down the rabbit hole here and say that we need to
> > add bgworker "categories" with reserved pools of worker slots for each
> > category. But do we really need that?
> If we change these processes to bgworker, we can categorize them into
> two, auxiliary process(check pointer and  wal sender etc) and other
> worker process.
> And max_worker_processes controls the latter.

Right. I think that's probably the direction we should be going eventually.
Personally I don't think such a change should block the logical replication
work from proceeding with bgworkers, though. It's been delayed a long time,
a lot of people want it, and I think we need to focus on meeting the core
requirements not getting too sidetracked on minor points.

Of course, everyone's idea of what's core and what's a minor sidetrack
differs ;)

 Craig Ringer                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Reply via email to