| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alexey Klyukin <alexk(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Postgres-R: internal messaging |
| Date: | 2008-07-23 15:01:29 |
| Message-ID: | 15284.1216825289@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alexey Klyukin <alexk(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Markus Wanner wrote:
>> I'm currently doing this with imessages as well,
>> which violates the rule that the postmaster may not to touch shared
>> memory. I didn't look into ripping that out, yet. I'm not sure it can be
>> done with the existing signaling of the postmaster.
> In Replicator we avoided the need for postmaster to read/write backend's
> shmem data by using it as a signal forwarder.
You should also look at the current code for communication between
autovac launcher and autovac workers. That seems to be largely a
similar problem, and it's been solved in a way that seems to be
safe enough with respect to the postmaster vs shared memory issue.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-07-23 15:05:35 | Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-07-23 14:59:20 | Re: WITH RECUSIVE patches 0723 |