Re: Question about SHM_QUEUE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From ITAGAKI Takahiro
Subject Re: Question about SHM_QUEUE
Date
Msg-id 20070411155407.0FA0.ITAGAKI.TAKAHIRO@oss.ntt.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Question about SHM_QUEUE  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Question about SHM_QUEUE  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> > I have a question about SHM_QUEUE. Why do we need this component?
> It's a hangover from Berkeley days that no one has felt a need to remove yet.
> 
> > Then, can we replace SHM_QUEUE by a pointer-based double-linked list?
> What exactly will you gain by it?  I'm not inclined to fool with that
> code for trivial reasons ...

Hmmm, my next question is whether we should use SHM_QUEUE or not in
new modules. The point deluded me when I wrote DSM and I wondered
the autovacuum-multiworkers patch uses SHM_QUEUE.

Regards,
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Open Source Software Center




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: CIC and deadlocks
Next
From: "Pavan Deolasee"
Date:
Subject: Re: CIC and deadlocks