Re: Posix Shared Mem patch

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Alvaro Herrera
Тема Re: Posix Shared Mem patch
Дата
Msg-id 1340747489-sup-3669@alvh.no-ip.org
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Posix Shared Mem patch  (Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com>)
Ответы Re: Posix Shared Mem patch  (Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Excerpts from Daniel Farina's message of mar jun 26 17:40:16 -0400 2012:

> On that, I used to be of the opinion that this is a good compromise (a
> small amount of interlock space, plus mostly posix shmem), but I've
> heard since then (I think via AgentM indirectly, but I'm not sure)
> that there are cases where even the small SysV segment can cause
> problems -- notably when other software tweaks shared memory settings
> on behalf of a user, but only leaves just-enough for the software
> being installed.

This argument is what killed the original patch.  If you want to get
anything done *at all* I think it needs to be dropped.  Changing shmem
implementation is already difficult enough --- you don't need to add the
requirement that the interlocking mechanism be changed simultaneously.
You (or whoever else) can always work on that as a followup patch.

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Posix Shared Mem patch
Следующее
От: "Kevin Grittner"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Catalog/Metadata consistency during changeset extraction from wal