Dear Iwata-san, >Background >========== >If the background workers connect to databases, some database-related commands >like ALTER DATABASE RENAME and ALTER DATABASE SET TABLESPACE cannot be done. >Users must do DROP EXTENSION related with workers, or terminate them by >themselves >if they want to drop or alter the database. > >Proposal >======== >Based on above, I would like to propose to terminate background workers >automatically >when such SQLs are executed. > >This feature allows the DBMS daemon to send a termination signal to background >workers >created by users currently operating on the database when executing commands >that make >significant changes to the database.
Per my understanding, we already have a facility that terminates a background worker, TerminateBackgroundWorker(). So, I'm afraid your proposal has already been done by combining this function and ProcessUtility_hook. So, is the main benefit of the patch to shorten extensions codes which uses bgworker? Best regards, Hayato Kuroda FUJITSU LIMITED
