Re: Unexpected "shared memory block is still in use"

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Peter Eisentraut
Тема Re: Unexpected "shared memory block is still in use"
Дата
Msg-id 8cd56b77-dfd9-cfbe-cad2-663939b5f510@2ndquadrant.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Unexpected "shared memory block is still in use"  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Unexpected "shared memory block is still in use"  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 2019-08-14 01:22, Tom Lane wrote:
> Attached is a draft patch to change both shmem and sema key selection
> to be based on data directory inode rather than port.
> 
> I considered using "st_ino ^ st_dev", or some such, but decided that
> that would largely just make it harder to manually correlate IPC
> keys with running postmasters.  It's generally easy to find out the
> data directory inode number with "ls", but the extra work to find out
> and XOR in the device number is not so easy, and it's not clear what
> it'd buy us in typical scenarios.

For the POSIX APIs where the numbers are just converted to a string, why
not use both -- or forget about the inodes and use the actual data
directory string.

For the SYSV APIs, the scenario that came to my mind is if someone
starts a bunch of servers each on their own mount, it could happen that
the inodes of the data directories are very similar.

There is also the issue that AFAICT the key_t in the SYSV APIs is always
32-bit whereas inodes are 64-bit.  Probably not a big deal, but it might
prevent an exact one-to-one mapping.

Of course, ftok() is also available here as an existing solution.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Ibrar Ahmed
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PATCH] Implement INSERT SET syntax
Следующее
От: Etsuro Fujita
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm forpartition-wise join