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

Re: [PATCH] "could not reattach to shared memory" on Windows

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tsutomu Yamada <tsutomu(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] "could not reattach to shared memory" on Windows
Date: 2009-08-11 14:30:26
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 19:33, Magnus Hagander<magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 16:58, Tom Lane<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 16:10, Tom Lane<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>>> 8.2 as well, no?
>>> 8.2 has a different shmem implementation - the one that emulates sysv
>>> shmem. The patch will need to be changed around for that, and I
>>> haven't looked at that. It may be worthwhile to do that, but it's a
>>> separate patch, so let's get it out in 8.3 and 8.4 first.
>> If it's at all hard to do, I could see deprecating 8.2 for Windows
>> instead.
> I haven't looked at how much work it would be at all yet. So let's do
> that before we decide to deprecate anything. As mentioned downthread,
> 8.2 is a very widespread release, and we really want to avoid
> deprecating it.

Here's an attempt at a backport to 8.2. I haven't examined it  in
detail, but it passes "make check" on mingw.


 Magnus Hagander

Attachment: virtualalloc_82.patch
Description: text/x-diff (5.5 KB)

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Fujii MasaoDate: 2009-08-11 14:54:22
Subject: Re: Hot standby and synchronous replication status
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-08-11 14:02:01
Subject: Re: Shipping documentation untarred

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group