Re: wal_sender_delay is still required?

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Maybe we should have a single tunable for processes that just sleep
> waiting for events or postmaster death.  For example pgstats has a
> hardcoded 2 seconds, and the archiver process has a hardcoded value too
> AFAICS.

That would make sense once we get to the point where for all of those
processes, the sleep delay *only* affects the time to notice postmaster
death.  Right now I think there are still several other behaviors mixed
in with that, and not all of them necessarily want the same response
time.

			regards, tom lane