On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 09:02:54AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I've been sleeping on that a bit more, and I'd still go with the
> refactoring where we initialize one cluster and have all the tests
> done by TAP, for the sake of being much cheaper without changing the
> coverage, while being more extensible when it comes to introduce tests
> for the follow-up patch on custom wait events.
For now, please note that I have applied your idea to add "dynamic" to
the names of the bgworkers registered on a worker_spi_launch() as this
is useful on its own. I have given up on the "static" part, because
that felt unconsistent with the API names, and we don't use this term
in the docs for bgworkers, additionally.
--
Michael