Re: [HACKERS] why do shmem attach?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] why do shmem attach? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 13909.937838950@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] why do shmem attach? (Vadim Mikheev <vadim@krs.ru>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Vadim Mikheev <vadim@krs.ru> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Have I got a deal for you ;-). I have uncommitted changes that add >> a pointer (SHMEM_OFFSET that is) to each backend's PROC struct into >> the per-backend info array that already existed in shmem.c. > Nice. I have new member for PROC that should be searched > sometime -:) OK, cool. Easy enough to add now. The reason I did this was that I added to PROC the OID of the database the backend is attached to, so that I could make a routine to tell whether any running backends are connected to a given database. I couldn't quite stomach adding yet another ShmemIndex-traverser to shmem.c, so... (I'm sure you can see already where I'm going with that: DESTROY DATABASE now refuses to destroy a database that has running backends. I got burnt that way once too often. The interlock against halfway-started backends was a tad tricky, but I think it works.) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: