If a database shutdown (smart or fast) is commanded between the time
some process decides to request a new background worker and the time
that the postmaster can launch that worker, then nothing happens
because the postmaster won't launch any bgworkers once it's exited
PM_RUN state.  This is fine ... unless the requesting process is
waiting for that worker to finish (or even for it to start); in that
case the requestor is stuck, and only manual intervention will get us
to the point of being able to shut down.

To fix, cancel pending requests for workers when the postmaster sends
shutdown (SIGTERM) signals, and similarly cancel any new requests that
arrive after that point.  (We can optimize things slightly by only
doing the cancellation for workers that have waiters.)  To fit within
the existing bgworker APIs, the "cancel" is made to look like the
worker was started and immediately stopped, causing deregistration of
the bgworker entry.  Waiting processes would have to deal with
premature worker exit anyway, so this should introduce no bugs that
weren't there before.  We do have a side effect that registration
records for restartable bgworkers might disappear when theoretically
they should have remained in place; but since we're shutting down,
that shouldn't matter.

Back-patch to v10.  There might be value in putting this into 9.6
as well, but the management of bgworkers is a bit different there
(notably see 8ff51869) and I'm not convinced it's worth the effort
to validate the patch for that branch.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/661570.1608673226@sss.pgh.pa.us