public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
To: Nathan Bossart <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Thomas Munro <[email protected]>
Cc: Fujii Masao <[email protected]>
Cc: Postgres hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Weird failure with latches in curculio on v15
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2023 08:56:24 +0900
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230208222554.GB546776@nathanxps13>
References: <[email protected]>
<20230205221938.GA274245@nathanxps13>
<[email protected]>
<20230205235747.GA275913@nathanxps13>
<[email protected]>
<20230206004631.GA277434@nathanxps13>
<CA+TgmoYMk+NtLxU8xpAvWe_6K783d2Pr09cUpUJFRChdj_rcbQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20230208174350.GB451849@nathanxps13>
<CA+TgmobY5ALQE4U2q32YohLbJfze8CDBZ3rs2x2+ccAa+Pqw6g@mail.gmail.com>
<20230208222554.GB546776@nathanxps13>
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 02:25:54PM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> These are all good points. Perhaps there could be a base archiver
> implementation that shell_archive uses (and that other modules could use if
> desired, which might be important for backward compatibility with the
> existing callbacks). But if you want to do something fancier than
> archiving sequentially, you could write your own.
Which is basically the kind of things you can already achieve with a
background worker and a module of your own?
> In any case, I'm not really wedded to any particular approach at the
> moment, so I am likewise open to better ideas.
I am not sure how much we should try to move from core into the
modules when it comes to the current archiver process, with how much
control you'd like to give to users. It also looks like to me that
this is the kind of problem where we would not have the correct
callback design until someone comes in and develops a solution that
would shape around it. On top of that, this is the kind of things
achievable with just a bgworker, and perhaps simpler as the parallel
state can just be maintained in it, which is what the archiver process
is about at the end? Or were there some restrictions in the bgworker
APIs that would not fit with what an archiver process should do?
Perhaps these restrictions, if any, are what we'd better try to lift
first?
--
Michael
Attachments:
[application/pgp-signature] signature.asc (833B, ../[email protected]/2-signature.asc)
download
view thread (15+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Weird failure with latches in curculio on v15
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox