On Sat, 2004-05-29 at 11:04, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > It is supposed to be linked into the postmaster and forked from there.
> In the current state of pg_autovacuum it wouldn't matter a lot, but
> I am assuming that we will soon migrate it to depend on being part of
> the postmaster environment. For instance, it ought to be configured
> from GUC, which will mean it has to receive SIGHUP from the postmaster.
> In an only slightly longer timeframe, it will probably want access to
> shared memory so it can look at stats maintained in the FSM. These
> attributes would make it quite inappropriate for autovacuum to live in
> BTW, Matthew, I am currently working on promoting the bgwriter into a
> more full-fledged postmaster child. If you can wait a day or so you
> should have a decent model to work from. I'll try to commit as soon
> as a working skeleton is in place.
I can wait, but I am really trying not to miss the feature freeze which
AFAIK, is still happening in a few days. Is that changing? Will I have
time if I wait a few days? Especially given that my backend hacking
skill leave much to be desired.
My main priority is that I want pg_autovacuum to move ahead and I don't
want to miss 7.5.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]