Re: [HACKERS] don't use MAKE_PTR/OFFSET for shmem pointers

Tom Lane wrote: Kris Jurka [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Since we require every process to map the shared memory region to the same address, we don't need the MAKE_PTR/OFFSET code that was needed when that was not the case. This patch makes shared memory pointers just like regular

Re: [HACKERS] don't use MAKE_PTR/OFFSET for shmem pointers

Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We now have two very similar doubly-linked list implementations. Should we take one of them out? If you're thinking of dllist, it has considerably different implementation assumptions. regards, tom lane -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] don't use MAKE_PTR/OFFSET for shmem pointers

Kris Jurka [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Since we require every process to map the shared memory region to the same address, we don't need the MAKE_PTR/OFFSET code that was needed when that was not the case. This patch makes shared memory pointers just like regular pointers. Applied with minor

[HACKERS] don't use MAKE_PTR/OFFSET for shmem pointers

Since we require every process to map the shared memory region to the same address, we don't need the MAKE_PTR/OFFSET code that was needed when that was not the case. This patch makes shared memory pointers just like regular pointers.