Re: Question about SHM_QUEUE
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Question about SHM_QUEUE |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8317.1176273489@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Question about SHM_QUEUE (ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: Question about SHM_QUEUE
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> writes: > I have a question about SHM_QUEUE. Why do we need this component? It's a hangover from Berkeley days that no one has felt a need to remove yet. The convention back then was that shared memory might be mapped to different addresses in different processes. We've since adopted the assumption that everyone will see the same addresses, but we have not made any attempt to eradicate the old approach everywhere. > Then, can we replace SHM_QUEUE by a pointer-based double-linked list? > It will be an "intrusive" version of Dllist. What exactly will you gain by it? I'm not inclined to fool with that code for trivial reasons ... regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: