Re: dynamic shared memory: wherein I am punished for good intentions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: dynamic shared memory: wherein I am punished for good intentions
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZkdrUBN5FgyOuED0oxDbCGmyqc02=PmdQPcOmF6DrveA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: dynamic shared memory: wherein I am punished for good intentions  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Responses Re: dynamic shared memory: wherein I am punished for good intentions  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Re: dynamic shared memory: wherein I am punished for good intentions  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:13 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> (2) Default to using System V shared memory.  If people want POSIX
>> shared memory, let them change the default.
>
>> After some consideration, I think my vote is for option #2.
>
> Wouldn't that become the call of packagers?

Packagers can certainly override whatever we do, but we still need to
make the buildfarm green again.

> Wasn't there already some
> reason why it was advantageous for FreeBSD to continue to use System V
> shared memory?

Yes, but this code doesn't affect the main shared memory segment, so I
think that's sort of a separate point.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem