Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > My understanding is that we used to have that and it was removed > for the reasons Heikki states. There are still vestigial bits > still in code. > > Not exactly impressed with the SHM_QUEUE stuff though, so I > appreciate the sentiment that Kevin expresses. So, if I just allocated a fixed memory space to provide an API similar to my previous post, does that sound reasonable to you? For the record, my intention would be to hide the SHM_QUEUE structures in this API -- an entry would be just the structure you're interested in working with. If practical, I would prefer for ShmList to be a pointer to an opaque structure; users of this shouldn't really be exposed to or depend upon the implementation. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
