Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Brian E Gallew
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6
Date
Msg-id emacs-smtp-532-14172-4580-723607@export.andrew.cmu.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> ... Another idea
> is to send a signal to each backend that has marked a bit in shared
> memory saying it has written to a relation, and have the signal handler
> fsync all its dirty relations, set a finished bit, and have the
> postmaster then fsync pglog.

One other problem with signals is that things get complicated if
PostgreSQL ever moves to a multi-threading model.

-- 
=====================================================================
| JAVA must have been developed in the wilds of West Virginia.      |
| After all, why else would it support only single inheritance??    |
=====================================================================
| Finger geek@cmu.edu for my public key.                            |
=====================================================================

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Bug in LIKE ?
Next
From: "Jackson, DeJuan"
Date:
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] inet type & select