Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6
От | Brian E Gallew |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | emacs-smtp-532-14172-4580-723607@export.andrew.cmu.edu обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | 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. | =====================================================================
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: