Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 23:40:51 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] semaphore usage "port based"? Message-ID: <20060403233826.Q76562@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <16158.1144094263@sss.pgh.pa.us> References: <26796.1144028094@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20060402225204.U947@ganymede.hub.org> <26985.1144029657@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20060402231232.C947@ganymede.hub.org> <27148.1144030940@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20060402232832.M947@ganymede.hub.org> <20060402234459.Y947@ganymede.hub.org> <27417.1144033691@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20060403164139.D36756@fledge.watson.org> <14654.1144082224@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20060403194251.GF4474@ns.snowman.net> <16158.1144094263@sss.pgh.pa.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Tom Lane wrote: > BTW, as long as we're annoying the freebsd-stable list with discussions of > workarounds, I'm wondering whether our shared memory code might have similar > risks. Does FBSD 6 also lie about the existence of other-jail processes > connected to a shared memory segment --- ie, in shmctl(IPC_STAT)'s result, > does shm_nattch count only processes in our own jail? People are, of course, welcome to read the Jail documentation in order to read the warning about not enabling the System V IPC support in Jails, and what the possible results of doing so are. Robert N M Watson
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060403233826.Q76562>