From: | Myron Scott <mkscott(at)sacadia(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, Iavor Raytchev <iavor(dot)raytchev(at)verysmall(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Discontent with development process (was:Re: pgaccess - the discussion is over) |
Date: | 2002-05-14 16:17:58 |
Message-ID: | 3CE138B6.6040304@sacadia.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces |
Tom Lane wrote:
>
>
>With a little more intelligence in the manager of this table, this could
>also solve my concern about pointer variables. Perhaps the entries
>could include not just address/size but some type information. If the
>manager knows "this variable is a pointer to a palloc'd string" then it
>could do the Right Thing during fork. Not sure offhand what the
>categories would need to be, but we could derive those if anyone has
>cataloged the variables that get passed down from postmaster to children.
>
>I don't think it needs to be a hashtable --- you wouldn't ever be doing
>lookups in it, would you? Just a simple list of things-to-copy ought to
>do fine.
>
>
I'm thinking in a threaded context where a method may need to lookup a
global that is not passed in. But for copying, I suppose no lookups
would be
neccessary.
Myron Scott
mkscott(at)sacadia(dot)com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2002-05-14 16:29:23 | Global Variables (Was: Re: Discontent with development process (was:Re: pgaccess - the discussion is over) ) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-05-14 15:59:32 | Re: Discontent with development process (was:Re: pgaccess - the discussion is over) |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2002-05-14 16:29:23 | Global Variables (Was: Re: Discontent with development process (was:Re: pgaccess - the discussion is over) ) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-05-14 15:59:32 | Re: Discontent with development process (was:Re: pgaccess - the discussion is over) |