Re: GUC patch 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: PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: GUC patch for Win32
Date: 2003-05-02 04:23:35
Message-ID: 200305020423.h424Nal19695@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:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Where exactly is the interlock to ensure that the new backend will end up
> >> with the correct settings if someone is changing the values at about
> >> the time of the fork?
>
> > Postmaster creates a new file, then does rename() to move it to the name
> > used by the backends. It can't move it until the file is not in use.
>
> And?
>
> How exactly does that guarantee that the new backend will see an update
> occurring at about the same time? I'm pretty sure that GUC is fired up
> before backends start listening to signals (and that's assuming the
> Windows port has a Unixy idea of signal response, which I seem to recall
> you telling me wasn't the case).

Oh, I am not sure. I haven't gotten the signal stuff done yet.

--
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

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Manfred Koizar 2003-05-02 10:01:34 Simple LRU for clog and (later) subtrans
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-05-02 04:14:25 Re: GUC patch for Win32