Re: autovacuum multiworkers, patch 5

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: autovacuum multiworkers, patch 5
Date: 2007-04-12 14:58:16
Message-ID: 20070412145816.GA15947@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
> >
> > I tested your patch on Linux and Windows. It works well on Linux,
> > where we use fork(), but falls into segfault on Windows, where we
> > use exec(). Maybe you forgot to initialize the shared memory stuff.
> > (I haven't find out where to be fixed, sorry.)
>
> Ok, thanks, this confirms that I have to try the EXEC_BACKEND code path.

Oh, uh, the problem is that CreateSharedMemoryAndSemaphores wants to
have access to the PGPROC already, but to obtain the PGPROC we need
access to autovac shared memory (per AutoVacuumGetFreeProc). So this
wasn't too bright a choice :-(

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ron 2007-04-12 14:59:10 Re: Slow Postgresql server
Previous Message Gregory Stark 2007-04-12 14:55:07 Re: elog(FATAL) vs shared memory

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ron 2007-04-12 14:59:10 Re: Slow Postgresql server
Previous Message Guido Neitzer 2007-04-12 14:08:03 Re: Slow Postgresql server