On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Andrew Borodin <boro...@octonica.com> wrote:
> 2017-01-04 10:23 GMT+05:00 amul sul <sula...@gmail.com>:
>> One more query, can we modify
>> BackgroundSessionStart()/BackgroundSession struct to get background
>> worker PID as well?
> I think since session always has a PID it's absoultley reasonable to return 
> PID.
>> I can understand this requirement could be sound useless for now,
>> because it only for the benefit of pg_background contrib module only.
> As far as i can unserstand BackgroundSession is not just a feature
> itself, it's the API. So PID would benefit to pg_background and all
> API use cases we didn't implement yet. I do not think that one PID in
> structure will waste huge amount of memory, cycles, dev time,
> readbility of docs, clearness of API etc. AFAIK the only reason may be
> if the PID is not always there.

+1, but to make BackgroundSession member accessible outside of
bgsession.c,  we might need to moved BackgroundSession definition to

Amul Sul

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to