| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gary Doades <gpd(at)gpdnet(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: 8.0 Beta3 worked, RC1 didn't! |
| Date: | 2004-12-24 16:03:31 |
| Message-ID: | 8690.1103904211@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers-win32 |
Gary Doades <gpd(at)gpdnet(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> AFAIK Win32 does not care where in private process address space the
> "shared memory" segment is. It can be mapped to different addresses in
> different processes and still share the same physical address space.
> This is why Win32 puts the private shared address anywhere in its own
> address space, because it doesn't matter.
Win32 may not care, but we do. The shared memory segment must be mapped
at the same address in every backend.
> If you try to force it to any particular private process address you may
> fail as you don't always know where program code (DLLs etc.) may be loaded.
This is (or ought to be) irrelevant, because we are only talking about
instances of a single executable.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gary Doades | 2004-12-24 16:15:30 | Re: Fwd: 8.0 Beta3 worked, RC1 didn't! |
| Previous Message | Gary Doades | 2004-12-24 15:50:17 | Re: Fwd: 8.0 Beta3 worked, RC1 didn't! |