Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: POSIX shared memory support

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: POSIX shared memory support
Date: 2008-03-31 19:54:12
Message-ID: 19364.1206993252@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> Right, I had an idea about that but didn't really want to clutter the
> response to the general idea with it.  At least on Linux (I don't know
> if it's the case elsewhere..), creating a POSIX shm ends up creating an
> actual 'file' in /dev/shm/, which you might be able to count the
> hard-links to in order to get an idea of the number of processes using
> it?  It was just a thought that struck me, not sure if it's at all
> possible.

That's not gonna work on anything but Linux, AFAIK.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Stephen FrostDate: 2008-03-31 19:55:06
Subject: Re: actualized SQL/PSM patch
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-03-31 19:52:46
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] ANALYZE getting dead tuple count hopelessly wrong

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2008-03-31 20:07:57
Subject: Re: POSIX shared memory support
Previous:From: James MansionDate: 2008-03-31 19:37:45
Subject: Re: POSIX shared memory support

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group