| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, "wangsh(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <wangsh(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: make MaxBackends available in _PG_init |
| Date: | 2022-04-18 23:33:54 |
| Message-ID: | 2395586.1650324834@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I noticed that requests for more LWLocks follow a similar pattern as
> regular shared memory requests, and I figured that we would want to do
> something similar for those, but I wasn't sure exactly how to proceed. I
> saw two options: 1) use shmem_request_hook for both regular requests and
> LWLock requests or 2) introduce an lwlock_request_hook. My instinct was
> that option 1 was preferable,
Yeah, I agree, which says that maybe the hook name needs to be something
else (not that I have a good proposal).
> but AFAICT this requires introducing a new
> external variable for inspecting whether the request is made at a valid
> time.
Uh, why? It'd be the core code's responsibility to place the hook
call at a point where you could do both.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2022-04-19 00:12:20 | Re: make MaxBackends available in _PG_init |
| Previous Message | Peter Smith | 2022-04-18 23:15:37 | Re: PG DOCS - logical replication filtering |