On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 09:39:58PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > Having discussed this quite a bit lately with David Steele and Magnus, > it's pretty clear that we need to completely rip out how this works > today and rewrite it based around an extension model where a background > worker can start up and essentially take the place of the archiver > process, with flexibility to jump forward through the WAL stream, > communicate clearly with other processes, handle failure to do so > gracefully based on the specific cases, etc.
Hm. When an instance state is in PM_SHUTDOWN_2, the postmaster explicitely waits for the WAL senders and the archiver to shut down. So I think that you would need more control regarding the timing a bgworker should be shut down first to be completely correct. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
