|From:||Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>|
|To:||David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>|
|Cc:||Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dan Ports <drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org|
|Subject:||Re: SSI patch version 14|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox|
On 02/09/2011 04:16 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 09:09:48PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Frankly, I think this is an example of how our current shared memory
>> model is a piece of garbage.
> What other model(s) might work better?
Thread based, dynamically allocatable and resizeable shared memory, as
most other projects and developers use, for example.
My dynshmem work is a first attempt at addressing the allocation part of
that. It would theoretically allow more dynamic use of the overall
fixed amount of shared memory available (instead of requiring every
subsystem to use a fixed fraction of the overall available shared
memory, as is required now).
It has dismissed from CF 2010-07 for good reasons (lacking evidence of
usable performance, possible patent issues (on the allocator chosen),
lots of work for questionable benefit (existing subsystems would have to
be reworked to use that allocator)).
For anybody interested, please search the archives for 'dynshmem'.
|Next Message||Kevin Grittner||2011-02-09 15:58:50||Re: SSI patch version 14|
|Previous Message||Alexey Klyukin||2011-02-09 15:24:23||Re: arrays as pl/perl input arguments [PATCH]|