From: | Chris Marcellino <maps(at)levelview(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
Cc: | <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Feature: POSIX Shared memory support |
Date: | 2007-02-07 04:44:34 |
Message-ID: | 6C3E385E-E4F0-4429-A65E-8456046A298D@levelview.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Yes, as Tom pointed out. Sorry, I misread the autoconf file. I've
gotten quite used to Darwin == BSD.
I've added a note to my todo list to look into the posix semaphore
performance on the Darwin side.
--Chris
On Feb 6, 2007, at 8:32 PM, Takayuki Tsunakawa wrote:
>>> Then, how about semaphores? When I just do configure, PostgreSQL
>>> seems to use SysV semaphores. But POSIX semaphore implementation
> is
>>> prepared in src/backend/port/posix_sema.c. Why isn't it used by
>>> default? Does it have any problem?
>>>
>>
>> Either way, Essentially, no one is running out of shared memory due
>> to semaphores.
>> In this case, semaphore usage is unrelated to shared memory
>> shortages.
>
> Yes, of course, shared memory is not related to semaphores.
>
>> Also, on many platforms the posix_sema's code is used.
>
> Really? When I run 'configure' without any parameter on Red Hat
> Enterprise Linux 4.0 (kernel 2.6.x), PostgreSQL uses SysV semaphores.
> I confirmed that by seeing the result of 'ipcs -u'. What platforms is
> POSIX sema used by PostgreSQL by default?
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Chris Marcellino | 2007-02-07 05:46:32 | Re: Feature: POSIX Shared memory support |
Previous Message | Takayuki Tsunakawa | 2007-02-07 04:32:17 | Re: Feature: POSIX Shared memory support |