Re: Proposal: Add a callback data parameter to GetNamedDSMSegment
| От | Sami Imseih |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Proposal: Add a callback data parameter to GetNamedDSMSegment |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAA5RZ0u264cXvMV3ac0BqUBWLdw68EYMrUaRKs5kTpP125zSog@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Proposal: Add a callback data parameter to GetNamedDSMSegment (Zsolt Parragi <zsolt.parragi@percona.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Proposal: Add a callback data parameter to GetNamedDSMSegment
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
> struct Foo {
> LWLock lock;
> size_t size;
> Bar data[];
> };
>
> * To create a few of these, I have to provide a lock name to the
> callback, that's the "reusing the same callback" part again
> * And then there's the question of initialization. Either I leave it
> to the caller after returning from GetNamedDSHash using the lock,
"caller after returning from GetNamedDSHash" <- do you mean
GetNamedDSMSegment ?
> or somehow I have to tell the initialization callback the array size -
> even if I can calculate the size based on a GUC,
```
typedef struct Bar {
int f1;
int f2;
} Bar;
typedef struct Foo {
LWLock lock;
size_t size;
Bar data[];
} Foo;
foo_state = GetNamedDSMSegment("Foo",
offsetof(Foo, data) + BAR_ARRAY_SIZE * sizeof(int),
foo_init_state,
&found);
```
wouldn't the above be sufficient to create a DSM segment containing
a flexible array?
--
Sami Imseih
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: