Re: POSIX shared memory support - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: POSIX shared memory support
Date
Msg-id 20080331220757.6642227a@mha-laptop
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: POSIX shared memory support  (James Mansion <james@mansionfamily.plus.com>)
Responses Re: POSIX shared memory support
List pgsql-hackers
James Mansion wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Yeah, I would be far more interested in this patch if it avoided
> > needing SysV shmem at all.  The problem is to find an adequate
> > substitute for the nattch-based interlock against live children of
> > a dead postmaster.
> >
> >   
> (confused) Why can't you use mmap of /dev/zero and inherit the fd
> into child processes?
> (simple enough to do something similar on Win32, even if the
> mechanism isn't identical)

This is what we do on win32 today. We don't use the sysv emulation
layer anymore.

//Magnus


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pgkill
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: POSIX shared memory support