From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
Cc: | rse(at)engelschall(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: [BUGS] Patch to allow C extension modules to initialize/finish |
Date: | 2006-08-03 21:51:37 |
Message-ID: | 26751.1154641897@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 05:30:48PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> One question I have is whether it really works as expected in all
>> cases. In particular what if the library is "preloaded" into the
>> postmaster?
> I'm not sure quite what you mean here, but PL/PerlU functions can
> use() modules, and those are called per-backend, i.e. when the
> function is invoked. There's also some possibility that something
> might go into %_SHARED.
Well, the point is that you could have a scenario where the PG_init
function is executed in the postmaster, the process image is duplicated
via fork(), and then in a specific backend a LOAD command is executed
causing the PG_fini function to be called. Is it likely that anything
would get confused by PG_init and PG_fini getting called by different
processes?
Also, if we do this we probably ought to remove the special-purpose
hack for preload_libraries to specify an init function --- it should
just happen by default. Any objections to simplifying that?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-08-03 21:56:53 | Re: [BUGS] Patch to allow C extension modules to initialize/finish |
Previous Message | David Fetter | 2006-08-03 21:37:12 | Re: [BUGS] Patch to allow C extension modules to initialize/finish |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-08-03 21:56:53 | Re: [BUGS] Patch to allow C extension modules to initialize/finish |
Previous Message | David Fetter | 2006-08-03 21:37:12 | Re: [BUGS] Patch to allow C extension modules to initialize/finish |