Re: Performance monitor signal handler - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alfred Perlstein
Subject Re: Performance monitor signal handler
Date
Msg-id 20010315161710.H29888@fw.wintelcom.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Performance monitor signal handler  (Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au>)
Responses Re: Performance monitor signal handler  (Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au>)
List pgsql-hackers
* Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au> [010315 16:14] wrote:
> At 06:57 15/03/01 -0500, Jan Wieck wrote:
> >
> >    And  shared  memory has all the interlocking problems we want
> >    to avoid.
> 
> I suspect that if we keep per-backend data in a separate area, then we
> don;t need locking since there is only one writer. It does not matter if a
> reader gets an inconsistent view, the same as if you drop a few UDP packets.

No, this is completely different.

Lost data is probably better than incorrect data.  Either use locks
or a copying mechanism.  People will depend on the data returned
making sense.

-- 
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Philip Warner
Date:
Subject: Re: Performance monitor signal handler
Next
From: Philip Warner
Date:
Subject: Re: Performance monitor signal handler