Re: [HACKERS] background workers, round three

2013-10-16 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Kohei KaiGai wrote: > Hmm. It probably allows to clean-up smaller fraction of data structure > constructed on dynamic shared memory segment, if we map / unmap > for each transactions. I think the primary use of dynamic shared memory will be for segments that get c

Re: [HACKERS] background workers, round three

2013-10-15 Thread Kohei KaiGai
2013/10/14 Robert Haas : >> * ephemeral-precious-v1.patch >> AtEOXact_BackgroundWorker() is located around other AtEOXact_* >> routines. Doesn't it makes resource management complicated? >> In case when main process goes into error handler but worker >> process is still running in health, it may co

Re: [HACKERS] background workers, round three

2013-10-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Kohei KaiGai wrote: > I briefly checked these patches. Let me add some comments. Thanks! > * terminate-worker-v1.patch > TerminateBackgroundWorker() turns on slot->terminate flag under > LW_SHARED lock. Is it reasonable because all the possible caller > is the ba

Re: [HACKERS] background workers, round three

2013-10-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > Few comments about the code: > 1) In postmaster.c, what about adding a comment here telling that we > can forget about this bgworker as it has already been requested for a > termination: > + if (rw->rw_worker.bgw_resta

Re: [HACKERS] background workers, round three

2013-10-12 Thread Kohei KaiGai
I briefly checked these patches. Let me add some comments. * terminate-worker-v1.patch TerminateBackgroundWorker() turns on slot->terminate flag under LW_SHARED lock. Is it reasonable because all the possible caller is the background worker process itself, isn't it? * ephemeral-precious-v1.patch

Re: [HACKERS] background workers, round three

2013-10-11 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > Finally I got the chance to put my hands on this code. Really sorry > for the late replay. Thanks for the review. I'll respond to this in more detail later, but to make a long story short, I'm looking to apply terminate-worker-v1.patch (p

Re: [HACKERS] background workers, round three

2013-10-11 Thread Michael Paquier
Hi, Finally I got the chance to put my hands on this code. Really sorry for the late replay. On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > Last week, I attempted to write some code to perform a trivial > operation in parallel by launching background workers. Despite my > earlier convic