| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Chris Marcellino <maps(at)levelview(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paesold <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Feature: POSIX Shared memory support |
| Date: | 2007-02-06 18:32:18 |
| Message-ID: | 20070206183218.GJ22166@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Chris Marcellino wrote:
> Tom, that is a definitely valid point and thanks for the feedback. I
> assume that the 'more modern' string segment naming gave the POSIX
> methods an edge in avoiding collision between other apps.
> As far as detecting a) whether anyone else is currently attached to
> that segment and b) whether an earlier existence of the current
> backend was still attached to a segment, I presumed that checking the
> pid's of the backend that owns the shared memory segment and checking
> the data directory (both which the SysV code already does) would
> suffice?
Is there an API call to list all PIDs that are connected to a particular
segment?
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chris Marcellino | 2007-02-06 18:37:23 | Re: Feature: POSIX Shared memory support |
| Previous Message | Chris Marcellino | 2007-02-06 18:27:08 | Re: Feature: POSIX Shared memory support |