Re: bg worker: patch 1 of 6 - permanent process
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: bg worker: patch 1 of 6 - permanent process |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 26863.1282850542@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: bg worker: patch 1 of 6 - permanent process (Markus Wanner <markus@bluegap.ch>) |
Ответы |
Re: bg worker: patch 1 of 6 - permanent process
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Markus Wanner <markus@bluegap.ch> writes: > On 08/26/2010 02:44 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On the more general topic of imessages, I had one other thought that >> might be worth considering. Instead of using shared memory, what >> about using a file that is shared between the sender and receiver? > What would that buy us? Not having to have a hard limit on the space for unconsumed messages? > The current approach uses plain spinlocks, which are more efficient. Please note the coding rule that says that the code should not execute more than a few straight-line instructions while holding a spinlock. If you're copying long messages while holding the lock, I don't think spinlocks are acceptable. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: