On 21 August 2017 at 21:44, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> While this would work, I don't really see the need for it given the > availability of nonblocking operations. See mq_putmessage() for an > example. > Makes sense, and I'm not especially concerned. If the expected solution to such usage is to use non-blocking calls, that's fine with me. I partly wanted to put this out there to help the next person looking into it. Or myself, when I've forgotten and go looking again ;) . But also, to ensure that this was in fact fully expected behaviour not an oversight re applying shm_mq to non-bgworker endpoints. -- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
