On 9 August 2016 at 17:28, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Sure, you can go deeper down the rabbit hole here and say that we need to > > add bgworker "categories" with reserved pools of worker slots for each > > category. But do we really need that? > > If we change these processes to bgworker, we can categorize them into > two, auxiliary process(check pointer and wal sender etc) and other > worker process. > And max_worker_processes controls the latter. Right. I think that's probably the direction we should be going eventually. Personally I don't think such a change should block the logical replication work from proceeding with bgworkers, though. It's been delayed a long time, a lot of people want it, and I think we need to focus on meeting the core requirements not getting too sidetracked on minor points. Of course, everyone's idea of what's core and what's a minor sidetrack differs ;) -- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
