Re: reorganize "Shared Memory and LWLocks" section of docs
От | Nathan Bossart |
---|---|
Тема | Re: reorganize "Shared Memory and LWLocks" section of docs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20240112154650.GA3565306@nathanxps13 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: reorganize "Shared Memory and LWLocks" section of docs (Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: reorganize "Shared Memory and LWLocks" section of docs
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Thanks for reviewing. On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 05:12:28PM +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote: > """ > Any registered shmem_startup_hook will be executed shortly after each > backend attaches to shared memory. > """ > > IMO the word "each" here can give the wrong impression as if there are > certain guarantees about synchronization between backends. Maybe we > should change this to simply "... will be executed shortly after > [the?] backend attaches..." I see what you mean, but I don't think the problem is the word "each." I think the problem is the use of passive voice. What do you think about something like Each backend will execute the registered shmem_startup_hook shortly after it attaches to shared memory. > """ > should ensure that only one process allocates a new tranche_id > (LWLockNewTrancheId) and initializes each new LWLock > (LWLockInitialize). > """ > > Personally I think that reminding the corresponding function name here > is redundant and complicates reading just a bit. But maybe it's just > me. Yeah, I waffled on this one. I don't mind removing it. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: