Re: PROC struct
От | Myron Scott |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PROC struct |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.GSO.4.10.10102051251240.2779-100000@goldengate.kojoworldwide.com. обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PROC struct (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, 5 Feb 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > Myron Scott <mscott@sacadia.com> writes: > > May I suggest that watiHolder and waitLock pointers > > in the proc struct in proc.h be changed from direct > > pointers to SHMEM_OFFSET. They are both shared memory > > structures in a shared memory structure and it would > > be more consistent to make these SHMEM_OFFSET. Direct > > pointers will be a problem if another process which is > > not the result of a fork tries to attach to the shared memory. > > I don't really foresee that that's an issue --- any process > we might conceivably want to have reading the shmem would be > spawned by the postmaster anyway. I've actually been thinking > about ripping out the shmem-offset-to-pointer-and-back conversions > on the grounds of code simplification, readability, reliability > (the compiler cannot detect whether you are casting a reconverted > SHMEM_OFFSET to the wrong pointer type), and speed. > > regards, tom lane > Thanks for looking into this. I ran into this while working on a threaded version of Postgres. I start a postmaster so I can use psql and then start the multithreaded Postgres which attaches to the shared mem created by the postmaster. This is not a big deal but maybe a note in the header would be helpful to future tinkerers. Thanks, Myron Scott mkscott@sacadia.com
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: