Heikki Linnakangas escribió:
> Looking at the latest streaming replication patch, I don't much like the
> signaling between WAL sender and postmaster. It seems complicated, and
> as a rule of thumb postmaster shouldn't be accessing shared memory. The
> current signaling is:
>
> 1. A new connection arrives. A new backend process is forked forked like
> for a normal connection.
This was probably discussed to death earlier, but: why was it decided to
not simply use a different port for listening for walsender
connections?
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.