On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 9/20/16 11:47 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >>>> >> #define BGWORKER_CLASS_MASK 0x00f0 >>>> >> #define BGWORKER_CLASS_PARALLEL 0x0010 >>>> >> /* add additional bgworker classes here */ >>> > >>> > Unless we have a mechanism that makes use of this somehow, this attempt >>> > at categorizing might be premature. >> My main reason for wanting is that I suspect there will be a similar >> desire to limit the number of replication workers at some point. > > Would that work for something developed as an extension? Would we all > have to agree on non-conflicting numbers? Maybe a string tag would work > better?
No, I'm assuming that the classes would be built-in. A string tag seems like over-engineering to me, particularly because the postmaster needs to switch on the tag, and we need to be very careful about the degree to which the postmaster trusts the contents of shared memory. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
