| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh(dot)2007(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yugo Nagata <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Autovacuum launcher occurs error when cancelled by SIGINT |
| Date: | 2017-06-22 22:02:59 |
| Message-ID: | 20170622220259.krj6uxcxzspd4of6@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Munro wrote:
> I thought about this when designing the DSA API. I couldn't think of
> any good reason to provide an 'am-I-already-attached?' function
> equivalent to dsm_find_mapping. It seemed to me that the client code
> shouldn't ever be in any doubt about whether it's attached, and that
> wilfully or absent-mindedly throwing away dsa_area pointers and having
> to ask for them again doesn't seem like a very good design. I suspect
> the same applies to dsm_find_mapping, and I don't see any callers in
> the source tree or indeed anywhere on the internet (based on a quick
> Google search). But I could be missing something.
I think such an API call is potentially useful for things like assertion
checks, if nothing else.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-06-22 23:00:02 | Re: initdb initalization failure for collation "ja_JP" |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-06-22 21:52:51 | Re: Proposal : For Auto-Prewarm. |