Re: [HACKERS] Providing anonymous mmap as an option of sharing memory

Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: And that helps how? The problem is to detect whether there are any children left from the old postmaster, when what you have to work from is the pid-file it left behind. fine. We need shared memory for that. How about using 1 8K

Re: [HACKERS] Providing anonymous mmap as an option of sharing memory

Tom Lane wrote: Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I was looking thr. the source and thought it would be worth to seek opinion on this proposal. This has been discussed and rejected before. See the archives. I went thr. this for details.

Re: [HACKERS] Providing anonymous mmap as an option of sharing memory

Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I covered only first point in my post. IMO it is not such a unsolvable problem. If a postmaster crashes hard but leaves a backend running, would it clean pid file etc? I don't think so. So if a postmaster can start on a 'pid-clean' state, then it

Re: [HACKERS] Providing anonymous mmap as an option of sharing memory

Tom Lane wrote: Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I covered only first point in my post. IMO it is not such a unsolvable problem. If a postmaster crashes hard but leaves a backend running, would it clean pid file etc? I don't think so. So if a postmaster can start on a

Re: [HACKERS] Providing anonymous mmap as an option of sharing memory

Tom Lane wrote: Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I covered only first point in my post. IMO it is not such a unsolvable problem. If a postmaster crashes hard but leaves a backend running, would it clean pid file etc? I don't think so. So if a postmaster can start on a 'pid-clean'

[HACKERS] Providing anonymous mmap as an option of sharing memory

Hello All, I was looking thr. the source and thought it would be worth to seek opinion on this proposal. From what I understood so far, the core shared memory handling is done in pgsql/src/backend/port/sysv_shmem.c. It is linked by configure as per the runtime environment. So I need to write

Re: [HACKERS] Providing anonymous mmap as an option of sharing memory

Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I was looking thr. the source and thought it would be worth to seek opinion on this proposal. This has been discussed and rejected before. See the archives. regards, tom lane ---(end of

splitting WAL (was RE: [HACKERS] Providing anonymous mmap as an option of sharing memory)

In case of WAL per database, the operations done on a shared catalog from a backend would need flushing system WAL and database WAL to ensure such transaction commit. Otherwise only flushing database WAL would do. I don't think that is a good idea. If you want databases separated you should