On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:37 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Looks good, committed. However, I changed it so that
> dsm_keep_segment() does not also perform the equivalent of
> dsm_keep_mapping(); those are two separate operations.
So are you expecting that if some one needs to retain dynamic segment's
till PM lifetime, they should call both dsm_keep_segment() and
dsm_keep_mapping()?
If we don't call both, it can lead to following warning:
postgres=# select dsm_demo_create('this message is from session-new', 1);
WARNING: dynamic shared memory leak: segment 1402373971 still referenced
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
