Re: this is in plain text (row level locks)

From: Sailesh Krishnamurthy <sailesh(at)cs(dot)berkeley(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jenny - <nat_lazy(at)hotmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: this is in plain text (row level locks)
Date: 2003-07-24 22:11:46
Message-ID: bxy1xwfo9r1.fsf@datafix.cs.berkeley.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

Tom> Sailesh Krishnamurthy <sailesh(at)cs(dot)berkeley(dot)edu> writes:
>> Why not have the traditional approach of a lock table in shared
>> memory, growing and shrinking as appropriate,

Tom> Because we can't grow shared memory. Whatever size we get at
Tom> startup is what we're stuck with. (I suppose we could try
Tom> asking the kernel for additional segments, but there's every
Tom> likelihood that that will fail.)

We implemented a Shared Memory MemoryContext using OSSP libmm (used in
Apache) for TelegraphCQ.

If you think it's useful I can submit it as a patch.

--
Pip-pip
Sailesh
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~sailesh

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-07-24 22:14:44 Re: this is in plain text (row level locks)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-07-24 22:09:53 Re: this is in plain text (row level locks)