On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: >> We've talked about a number of features that could benefit from some >> kind of "worker process" facility (e.g. logical replication, parallel >> query). So far no one has stepped forward to build such a facility, >> and I think without that this can't even get off the ground. > > Well, this specific thing could be done by just having PG close the > client connection, not care that it's gone, and have an implied > 'commit;' at the end. I'm not saying that I like this approach, but I > don't think it'd be hard to implement.
Maybe, but that introduces a lot of complications with regards to things like authentication. We probably want some API for a backend to say - hey, please spawn a session with the same user ID and database association as me, and also provide some mechanism for data transfer between the two processes. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
