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

Re: [HACKERS] fork/exec problem: DynaHashCxt

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Claudio Natoli <claudio(dot)natoli(at)memetrics(dot)com>
Cc: "'pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>,"'PostgreSQL Win32 port list'" <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] fork/exec problem: DynaHashCxt
Date: 2003-12-03 04:12:04
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-hackers-win32
Claudio Natoli <claudio(dot)natoli(at)memetrics(dot)com> writes:
> All the ShmemInitHash structures are allocated using DynaHashCxt.

I'm not sure if you're confusing backend-local hashes with shared
hashes, or hash control headers with the actual shared data.  But
the above is a false statement.  DynaHashCxt is not shared.

Shared hashes are a bit tricky because there is a backend-local
structure that has a pointer into the shared memory --- is that
what's confusing you?

Keep in mind that this code did work in a fork/exec context not
so many moons ago.  If you think you see a showstopper, it's a
relatively recent change and can be undone.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Marc G. FournierDate: 2003-12-03 04:12:24
Subject: 7.3.5 bundled ...
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-12-03 04:05:42
Subject: Re: Inside the Regex Engine

pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

Next:From: Claudio NatoliDate: 2003-12-03 04:48:42
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] fork/exec problem: DynaHashCxt
Previous:From: Claudio NatoliDate: 2003-12-03 01:36:59
Subject: fork/exec problem: DynaHashCxt

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group