Marc Munro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am content that what you suggest is the right way to go. I will work
> on a new patch immediately, unless you would prefer to do this yourself.
I've already got some of the relevant changes made in my local copy,
so I might as well just go ahead and fini
On Sat, 2006-10-14 at 14:55 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Marc Munro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The attached patch provides add-ins with the means to register for
> > shared memory and LWLocks.
>
> I finally got around to reviewing this patch, and realized that it's got
> a pretty fundamental desi
Marc Munro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The attached patch provides add-ins with the means to register for
> shared memory and LWLocks.
I finally got around to reviewing this patch, and realized that it's got
a pretty fundamental design flaw: it isn't useful under Windows (or any
other EXEC_BACKE
Marc Munro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The attached patch provides add-ins with the means to register for
>> shared memory and LWLocks. This greatly improves the ease with which
>> shared memory may be used from add-ins, while blah blah blah
> I have tried to be patient but this is my firs
