| From: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alexey Klyukin <alexk(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Postgres-R: internal messaging |
| Date: | 2008-07-23 17:36:37 |
| Message-ID: | 48876C25.40409@bluegap.ch |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
Tom Lane wrote:
> You should also look at the current code for communication between
> autovac launcher and autovac workers. That seems to be largely a
> similar problem, and it's been solved in a way that seems to be
> safe enough with respect to the postmaster vs shared memory issue.
Oh yeah, thanks for reminding me. Back when it was added I thought I
might find some helpful insights in there. But I didn't ever take the
time to read through it...
Regards
Markus Wanner
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marko Kreen | 2008-07-23 17:54:06 | Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution? |
| Previous Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2008-07-23 17:33:35 | Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution? |