MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230206004631.GA277434@nathanxps13> <CA+TgmoYMk+NtLxU8xpAvWe_6K783d2Pr09cUpUJFRChdj_rcbQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230208174350.GB451849@nathanxps13> <CA+TgmobY5ALQE4U2q32YohLbJfze8CDBZ3rs2x2+ccAa+Pqw6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230208222554.GB546776@nathanxps13> <Y+Q2qCecB8zcqF9S@paquier.xyz>
 <20230209002413.GA603595@nathanxps13> <CA+TgmobE6rRs-tMArr733y9VucgNA5Nd9_qYgEVWjJDwHBwP-Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <3907196.1675957889@sss.pgh.pa.us> <CA+TgmoY6xxDdZ1YJjMb27Ei7qgFcbu=__WtDX_cOd3GQ5uvxWw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230209172308.GA605342@nathanxps13>
In-Reply-To: <20230209172308.GA605342@nathanxps13>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2023 15:08:14 +0530
Message-ID: <CA+TgmoYeiHezg1yHy9Zk7rRAigD5q87fh2rOx19KBOMcTdgmMw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Weird failure with latches in curculio on v15
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, 
	Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, 
	Fujii Masao <fujii@postgresql.org>, 
	Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BTgmoYeiHezg1yHy9Zk7rRAigD5q87fh2rOx19KBOMcTdgmMw%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 10:53 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've been thinking about this, actually.  I'm wondering if we could provide
> a list of files to the archiving callback (configurable via a variable in
> ArchiveModuleState), and then have the callback return a list of files that
> are archived.  (Or maybe we just put the list of files that need archiving
> in ArchiveModuleState.)  The returned list could include files that were
> sent to the callback previously.  The archive module would be responsible
> for creating background worker(s) (if desired), dispatching files
> to-be-archived to its background worker(s), and gathering the list of
> archived files to return.

Hmm. So in this design, the archiver doesn't really do the archiving
any more, because the interface makes that impossible. It has to use a
separate background worker process for that, full stop.

I don't think that's a good design. It's fine if some people want to
implement it that way, but it shouldn't be forced by the interface.

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com