Re: [HACKERS] fork/exec problem: DynaHashCxt

2003-12-02 Thread Claudio Natoli
> Claudio Natoli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > So this means we'll have to pull relHash out of the shared FreeSpaceMap > > structure and make it a variable in it's own right? > > Hm. The freespace.c code is relatively new and might not be jumping > through all of the hoops it should be jumping

Re: [HACKERS] fork/exec problem: DynaHashCxt

2003-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Claudio Natoli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So this means we'll have to pull relHash out of the shared FreeSpaceMap > structure and make it a variable in it's own right? Hm. The freespace.c code is relatively new and might not be jumping through all of the hoops it should be jumping through. My

Re: [HACKERS] fork/exec problem: DynaHashCxt

2003-12-02 Thread Claudio Natoli
> I'm not sure if you're confusing backend-local hashes with shared > hashes, or hash control headers with the actual shared data. But > the above is a false statement. DynaHashCxt is not shared. No, wasn't confused over that. Was confused over something else though :-) > Shared hashes are a

Re: [HACKERS] fork/exec problem: DynaHashCxt

2003-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Claudio Natoli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > All the ShmemInitHash structures are allocated using DynaHashCxt. I'm not sure if you're confusing backend-local hashes with shared hashes, or hash control headers with the actual shared data. But the above is a false statement. DynaHashCxt is not sha