On 2017-08-14 12:21:30 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > >> ... If somebody has a system where no other form of shared > >> memory, works dynamic_shared_memory_type = mmap is still a thing, so > >> the use case for "none" seems very thin indeed. I'd vote for just > >> ripping it out in v11. > > > > Just FYI, the only values being reported by buildfarm animals are > > "posix", "sysv", and "windows". So while mmap may be a thing, > > it's an untested thing. > > I'm pretty sure I dev-tested it before committing anything, but, > certainly, having ongoing BF coverage woudn't be a bad thing.
Is there any platforms that require it? I thought posix, sysv and windows are sufficient? If we're going to start relying more on dsms we probably don't want to use mmap anyway... - Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
