"Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote: >> I'm not excited about inventing an API with just one use-case; >> it's unlikely that you actually end up with anything generally >> useful. (SHM_QUEUE seems like a case in point...) Especially >> when there are so many other constraints on what shared memory is >> usable for. You might as well just do this internally to the >> SERIALIZABLEXACT management code. > > Fair enough. I'll probably abstract it within the SSI patch > anyway, just because it will keep the other code cleaner where the > logic is necessarily kinda messy anyway, and I think it'll reduce > the chance of weird memory bugs. I just won't get quite so formal > about the interface. OK, I'd say it's a little rough yet, but it works. Is this reasonable?: http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=users/kgrittn/postgres.git;a=commitdiff;h=b8eca245ab63725d0fbfc3b5969f4a17fc765f2c In particular, I'm a little squeamish about how I allocated the shared memory for the list, but I couldn't think of anything that seemed better. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
