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

Re: Shared memory and memory context question

From: Richard Hills <richard(at)playford(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: "Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Shared memory and memory context question
Date: 2006-02-06 13:42:55
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon February 6 2006 05:17, Mark Woodward wrote:
> I posted some source to a shared memory sort of thing to the group, as
> well as to you, I believe.

	Indeed, and it looks rather interesting. I'll have a look through it when I 
have a chance...

	So, after more discussion and experimentation, the possible methods in order 
of +elegance/-difficulty/-complexity are:

=1. OSSP supported shared mem, possibly with a pg memory context or Mark's 
shared memory manager.
=1. Separate application which the postgres backends talk to over tcp (which 
actually turns out to be quite a clean way of doing it).
3. Storing rules in db and reloading them each time (which turns out to be a 
utter bastard to do).
4. Shared memory with my own memory manager.

	I am *probably* going to go for the separate network application, as I 
believe this is easy and relatively clean, as the required messages should be 
fairly straightforward. Each postgres backend opens a connection to the 
single separate "rules-server" which sends back a serious of commands 
(probably SQL), before the connection is closed again.

	If this is Clearly Insane - please let me know!



In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2006-02-06 13:49:13
Subject: Re: slow information schema with thausand users, seq.scan pg_authid
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2006-02-06 13:40:37
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Logging statements and parameter values

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group