Revised signal multiplexer patch
Hi,
I revised the patch according to the suggestion.
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Fujii Masao<masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
I think you're making things more complicated when they should be
getting simpler.It strikes me that the current API of "pass the BackendId if known or
InvalidBackendId if not" still works for processes without a BackendId,
as long as you can tolerate a bit of extra search overhead for them.
(You could reduce the search overhead by searching the array back to
front.) So a new process index may be overkill.Yeah, this is very simple. I'll change the patch according to your suggestion.
Done.
Umm... the patch should cover a notify interrupt which currently uses
SIGUSR2?Getting rid of the separate SIGUSR2 handler would definitely be a good
proof of concept that the mechanism works for more than one use.OK. I'll change the patch as above.
Done.
But there is one issue; the extra search is always required to send a notify
interrupt. This is because pg_listener doesn't have a backend ID and we
cannot pass it to SendProcSignal. In order to solve this issue, we should
newly add backend ID field into pg_listener?
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
Attachments:
signal_multiplexer_0729.patchapplication/octet-stream; name=signal_multiplexer_0729.patchDownload+415-105
Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> writes:
But there is one issue; the extra search is always required to send a notify
interrupt. This is because pg_listener doesn't have a backend ID and we
cannot pass it to SendProcSignal. In order to solve this issue, we should
newly add backend ID field into pg_listener?
Hmm. I'm not tremendously concerned about that --- the LISTEN/NOTIFY
code has been on the agenda for a complete rewrite for a long time now,
and I keep hoping pg_listener will go away entirely sometime soon.
I don't feel a need to go and fix a marginal performance issue there.
regards, tom lane
Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> writes:
I revised the patch according to the suggestion.
Applied with some mostly-cosmetic editorial work.
regards, tom lane
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 4:27 PM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> writes:
I revised the patch according to the suggestion.
Applied with some mostly-cosmetic editorial work.
regards, tom lane
Awesome, congrats.
...Robert
Hi,
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 5:27 AM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> writes:
I revised the patch according to the suggestion.
Applied with some mostly-cosmetic editorial work.
Thank you very much!
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center