| From: | Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)killerbytes(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Out of memory errors on OS X |
| Date: | 2004-10-03 20:10:57 |
| Message-ID: | BD85B8F1.ACEC%scott_ribe@killerbytes.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> Given that they have improved their SysV IPC support steadily over the
> past few Darwin releases, I don't see why you'd expect them to not be
> willing to do this. Having a larger default limit costs them *zero* if
> the feature is not used, so what's the objection?
The objection would be attitudinal. I detect a whiff of "that's sooo
obsolete, you should get with the program and do it our way instead" in
their docs...
--
Scott Ribe
scott_ribe(at)killerbytes(dot)com
http://www.killerbytes.com/
(303) 665-7007 voice
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mike Nolan | 2004-10-03 20:23:17 | Re: guaranteeing that a sequence never skips (fwd) |
| Previous Message | Christopher Browne | 2004-10-03 19:06:31 | Re: guaranteeing that a sequence never skips (fwd) |