Re: making bgworkers without shmem access actually not have shmem access

On 07/05/14 20:37, Robert Haas wrote:
> At a minimum, it's got to be better than the status quo, where shared
> memory is accessible throughout the entire lifetime of
> non-shmem-access background workers.
>

Seems reasonable to me, it might need to be revisited to at least try to 
figure out if we can make EXEC_BACKEND safer, but it's definitely better 
than the current state.


--  Petr Jelinek                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services