| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Multiplexing SUGUSR1 |
| Date: | 2008-12-09 16:29:15 |
| Message-ID: | 20081209162915.GH4053@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dimitri Fontaine escribió:
> Le mardi 09 décembre 2008, Tom Lane a écrit :
> > I think we need something closer to the postmaster signal multiplexing
> > mechanism, wherein there is a dedicated shared memory area of static
> > layout that holds the signaling flags. And it needs to be driven off
> > of knowing the target's PID, not anything else.
>
> ...this makes me recall IMessage Queues from Postgres-R, reworked by Markus to
> follow your advices about postmaster and shared memory.
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-07/msg01420.php
>
> Could it be the implementation we need for multiplexing signals from one
> backend some others?
No, the signalling needed here is far simpler than Markus' IMessage
stuff.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2008-12-09 16:34:06 | Re: parallel restore vs. windows |
| Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2008-12-09 16:24:47 | Re: Multiplexing SUGUSR1 |