Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Thanks! I had already incorporated the foreach_worker changes into my > code, and later realized that there's an important bug regarding the > PGPROC of the workers, so I've reworked the patch, which meant that the > foreach_worker() macro went away completely.
FWIW, the problem was that it is difficult to keep the "max_connections" control and still allow extra connections for autovacuum so that it doesn't hinder regular operation. The first thing I tried was enlarging the PGPROC array, but the problem with that is that the max_connection tests get unwieldy (it would have to cycle through all used PGPROCs and count the autovacuum ones). So I'm now leaning towards having autovacuum keep their PGPROCs separately, similarly to what the 2-phase code does, the main difference being that 2PC doesn't have semaphores, while these ones will because they need to acquire locks. This needs a bit of rejigger in InitProcess() so that it acquires a PGPROC from ProcGlobal if a regular backend, or from autovac's array otherwise. This has not been very invasive. If there's an objection to this, and/or better ideas, please speak quickly! -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
