Re: Back-patch use of unnamed POSIX semaphores for Linux?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Peter Eisentraut
Тема Re: Back-patch use of unnamed POSIX semaphores for Linux?
Дата
Msg-id e501493b-e361-50db-dcb1-24e1402d9444@2ndquadrant.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Back-patch use of unnamed POSIX semaphores for Linux?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 12/7/16 9:38 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Even with that change, dynamic shared memory is still vulnerable to be
>> removed.
> Really?  I thought we concluded that it is safe because it is detectably
> attached to running processes.

The DSM implementation uses POSIX shared memory, which doesn't have an
attachment count like SysV shared memory.

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



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Alexander Korotkov
Дата:
Сообщение: PgConf.Russia 2017 Call for Papers
Следующее
От: Stephen Frost
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Declarative partitioning - another take