| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Claudio Natoli <claudio(dot)natoli(at)memetrics(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Win32 port list <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] fork/exec patch |
| Date: | 2003-12-14 23:57:31 |
| Message-ID: | 3736.1071446251@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32 |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> ... Maybe we need a per-backend array in
> shared memory just for those keys. The postmaster has to keep those
> keys anyway, so moving into shared memory might be the right solution.
The postmaster's dependence on the contents of shared memory should
ideally be zero (and it is zero, or nearly so, at the moment).
Otherwise a backend crash that clobbers shared memory poses the risk of
taking down the postmaster as well. We can't go in that direction.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2003-12-15 00:02:31 | Re: fork/exec patch |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-12-14 23:53:22 | Re: fork/exec patch |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2003-12-15 00:02:31 | Re: fork/exec patch |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-12-14 23:53:22 | Re: fork/exec patch |