"Jonah H. Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 4/9/06, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I was considering a variant idea in the shower this morning:suppose >> that we invent one or more "background reader" processes that have >> basically the same infrastructure as the background writer, but have >> the responsibility of causing buffer reads to happen at useful times
> This is sort of what I'm playing with. There are N-number of backends > which are configured at startup and are available solely for parallel > processing. That's not remotely the same thing: a backend is a very different animal from a bgwriter. In particular, bgwriter (and bgreaders if we had 'em) aren't database-specific, don't need to think about permission checking as they don't execute on behalf of particular users, don't have syscaches to keep in-sync with everything else, etc etc. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings