Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)

From: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Larry Rosenman <ler(at)lerctr(dot)org>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)
Date: 2003-09-01 17:24:14
Message-ID: 20030901142339.I76431@ganymede.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Larry Rosenman wrote:
> >
> >
> > --On Monday, September 01, 2003 12:35:43 -0400 Bruce Momjian
> > <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >> Um. I don't think that's true. I mean, in theory it's true, but in
> > >> practice why would an OS have some *_r but have only non-thread-safe
> > >> versions of others?
> > >
> > > Oh, interesting. So you are saying that if the OS supports threads,
> > > then we use the *_r if they have them, and assume the non *_r functions
> > > are already thread-safe if they don't. Interesting.
> > >
> > > That seems to be what we have on Unixware, and on BSD/OS I have some *_r
> > > functions but not others, but they are all threadsafe, so your plan
> > > works there too.
> > UnixWare's Kernel is threaded, and I assume anything in libc is threadsafe
> > unless
> > told otherwise.
>
> What? You said Unixware needs getpwuid_r. And this has nothing to do
> with whether the kernel is threaded.

Note that Larry said "unless told otherwise", so I'm guessing that there
is somewhere in Unixware taht states that standard getpwuid isn't thread
safe? :)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Larry Rosenman 2003-09-01 17:25:36 Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-09-01 17:17:00 Re: Preliminary notes about hash index concurrency (long)