Re: [PATCH] s_lock support for win32

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Manfred Spraul <manfred(at)colorfullife(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] s_lock support for win32
Date: 2004-07-10 01:32:20
Message-ID: 200407100132.i6A1WKU17000@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Manfred Spraul wrote:
> >> But what about my libpq patch? Races in the library startup just ask for
> >> corruptions.
>
> > Yes, I saw the thread locking patch and will be applying that soon.
>
> Has this been agreed to by the win32-hackers list? My recollection is
> that there was still considerable disagreement about the appropriate
> way to deal with this issue.

Yes, we resolved that by doing proper locking (3 weeks ago), but it
turns out the code wasn't 100% proper and this fixes it.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2004-07-10 01:49:54 Re: [HACKERS] PgSQL 7.4.2 - NaN on Tru64 UNIX
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-07-10 01:20:57 Re: [PATCH] s_lock support for win32