On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 1:11 PM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 18:19 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> Dimitri Fontaine <dfonta...@hi-media.com> writes: >> > Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> writes: >> >> Why not just use pgAgent? It's far more flexible than the design >> >> you've suggested, and already exists. >> >> > What would it take to have it included in core, >> >> I don't think this really makes sense. There's basically no argument >> for having it in core other than "I'm too lazy to install a separate >> package". Unlike the case for autovacuum, there isn't anything an >> in-core implementation could do that an external one doesn't do as well >> or better. So I'm not eager to take on additional maintenance burden >> for such a thing. > > There is currently no way to run a separate daemon process that runs > user code as part of Postgres, so that the startup code gets run > immediately we startup, re-run if we crash and shut down cleanly when > the server does.
Good point. > If there were some way to run arbitrary code in a > daemon using an extensibility API then we wouldn't ever get any requests > for the scheduler, cos you could write it yourself without troubling > anybody here. That might be a little overly optimistic, but I get the point. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
