| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Streaming replication and postmaster signaling |
| Date: | 2010-01-05 14:29:54 |
| Message-ID: | 20100105142953.GE3660@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas escribió:
> Looking at the latest streaming replication patch, I don't much like the
> signaling between WAL sender and postmaster. It seems complicated, and
> as a rule of thumb postmaster shouldn't be accessing shared memory. The
> current signaling is:
>
> 1. A new connection arrives. A new backend process is forked forked like
> for a normal connection.
This was probably discussed to death earlier, but: why was it decided to
not simply use a different port for listening for walsender
connections?
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-01-05 15:08:20 | Re: Thoughts on statistics for continuously advancing columns |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-01-05 14:24:06 | Re: execute sql commands in core |