On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > On 2017-08-15 20:30:16 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 6:06 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: >> > Interesting. I was apparently thinking slightly differently. I'd have >> > thought we'd have Session struct in statically allocated shared >> > memory. Which'd then have dsa_handle, dshash_table_handle, ... members. >> >> Sounds an awful lot like what we're already doing with PGPROC. > > Except it'd be shared between leader and workers. So no, not really.
There's precedent for using it that way, though - cf. group locking. And in practice you're going to need an array of the same length as the procarray. It's maybe not quite the same thing, but it smells pretty similar. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
