Re: Providing anonymous mmap as an option of sharing memory

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)myrealbox(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Providing anonymous mmap as an option of sharing memory
Date: 2003-11-26 16:09:21
Message-ID: 15302.1069862961@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)myrealbox(dot)com> writes:
> I covered only first point in my post. IMO it is not such a unsolvable
> problem. If a postmaster crashes hard but leaves a backend running,
> would it clean pid file etc? I don't think so. So if a postmaster can
> start on a 'pid-clean' state, then it is guaranteed to be no childs
> left around.

And that helps how? The problem is to detect whether there are any
children left from the old postmaster, when what you have to work from
is the pid-file it left behind.

In any case, you're still handwaving away the very real portability
issues around mmap. Linux is not the universe, and Linux+BSD isn't
either.

We might still have considered it, despite the negatives, if anyone had
been able to point to any actual *advantages* of mmap. There are none.
Yes, the SysV shmem API is old and ugly and crufty, but it does what we
need it to do.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2003-11-26 16:14:36 Re: detecting poor query plans
Previous Message Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD 2003-11-26 16:04:35 Re: A rough roadmap for internationalization fixes