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

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: making bgworkers without shmem access actually not have shmem access
Date: 2014-05-07 18:44:43
Message-ID: 1430.1399488283@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I've complained about this problem a few times before: there's nothing
> to prevent a background worker which doesn't request shared memory
> access from calling InitProcess() and then accessing shared memory
> anyway. The attached patch is a first crack at fixing it.

> Comments?

Looks reasonable to me.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2014-05-07 18:45:04 Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2014-05-07 18:40:59 Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers