Re: introduce dynamic shared memory registry - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrei Lepikhov
Subject Re: introduce dynamic shared memory registry
Date
Msg-id 8d5b2883-8f55-413c-9548-097748709fc4@postgrespro.ru
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: introduce dynamic shared memory registry  (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: introduce dynamic shared memory registry
List pgsql-hackers
On 20/12/2023 17:33, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:02:58AM +0200, Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
>> In that case, maybe change the test case to make it closer to real-life
>> usage - with locks and concurrent access (See attachment)?
> 
> I'm not following why we should make this test case more complicated.  It
> is only intended to test the DSM registry machinery, and setting/retrieving
> an atomic variable seems like a realistic use-case to me.

I could provide you at least two reasons here:
1. A More complicated example would be a tutorial on using the feature 
correctly. It will reduce the number of questions in mailing lists.
2. Looking into existing extensions, I see that the most common case of 
using a shared memory segment is maintaining some hash table or state 
structure that needs at least one lock.

Try to rewrite the pg_prewarm according to this new feature, and you 
will realize how difficult it is.

-- 
regards,
Andrei Lepikhov
Postgres Professional




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dilip Kumar
Date:
Subject: Re: index prefetching
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree