On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 6:36 PM Bossart, Nathan <bossa...@amazon.com> wrote: > Based on previous threads I've seen, I believe many in the community > would like to replace archive_command entirely, but what I'm proposing > here would build on the existing tools. I'm currently thinking of > something a bit like autovacuum_max_workers, but the archive workers > would be created once and would follow a competing consumers model.
To me, it seems way more beneficial to think about being able to invoke archive_command with many files at a time instead of just one. I think for most plausible archive commands that would be way more efficient than what you propose here. It's *possible* that if we had that, we'd still want this, but I'm not even convinced. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com