| From: | Markus Schiltknecht <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: COPYable logs status |
| Date: | 2007-06-09 10:08:59 |
| Message-ID: | 466A7C3B.3040702@bluegap.ch |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Hi,
Tom Lane wrote:
> We *have* a log-writing process. The problem is in getting the data to it.
Remember the imessages approach I'm using for Postgres-R? It passes
messages around using shared memory and signals the receiver on incoming
data. It's not perfect, sure, but it's a general solution to a common
problem.
Maybe it's worth a thought, instead of fiddling with signals, special
shmem areas and possible races every time the 'getting data to another
process'-problem comes up?
Regards
Markus
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Cui Shijun | 2007-06-09 10:20:10 | Re: Issues with factorial operator |
| Previous Message | Dann Corbit | 2007-06-09 09:38:05 | Re: Issues with factorial operator |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-06-09 13:46:41 | Re: COPYable logs status |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2007-06-09 07:39:19 | Re: Controlling Load Distributed Checkpoints |