Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Yes, but those framework libraries are typically supposed to prevent
> such problems from being seen by applications calling them.

How exactly would a library prevent such problems?  In particular,
let's see a proposal for how libpq might make it look like a fork
was transparent for an open connection.

> This is
> certainly sloppy practice on Apple's part, and it leave us wondering if
> we are using anything that might be a problem.  The bottom line is that
> we don't know.

> Libraries are supposed to document these limitations, as we do with
> libpq.  I wonder if they just documented fork() and now don't feel they
> need to document these limitations per-library.

Do we know that they *didn't* document such issues per-library?
Mentioning the risk under fork() too doesn't seem unreasonable.

Not trying to sound like an Apple apologist, but I see a whole lot of
bashing going on here on the basis of darn little evidence.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

• Re: do we EXEC_BACKEND on Mac OS X? at 2012-10-03 17:08:17 from Bruce Momjian

Responses

• Re: do we EXEC_BACKEND on Mac OS X? at 2012-10-03 17:57:47 from Bruce Momjian

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2012-10-03 17:56:01
	Subject: Re: CREATE SCHEMA IF NOT EXISTS
Previous:	From: Fabrízio de Royes Mello	Date: 2012-10-03 17:29:38
	Subject: Re: CREATE SCHEMA IF NOT EXISTS