| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: introduce dynamic shared memory registry |
| Date: | 2024-01-08 17:18:48 |
| Message-ID: | 20240108171848.GB2611898@nathanxps13 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 11:13:42AM +0530, Amul Sul wrote:
> +void *
> +dsm_registry_init_or_attach(const char *key, size_t size,
>
> I think the name could be simple as dsm_registry_init() like we use
> elsewhere e.g. ShmemInitHash() which doesn't say attach explicitly.
That seems reasonable to me.
> Similarly, I think dshash_find_or_insert() can be as simple as
> dshash_search() and
> accept HASHACTION like hash_search().
I'm not totally sure what you mean here. If you mean changing the dshash
API, I'd argue that's a topic for another thread.
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jelte Fennema-Nio | 2024-01-08 17:19:53 | Re: Commitfest 2024-01 first week update |
| Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2024-01-08 17:16:27 | Re: introduce dynamic shared memory registry |