| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance |
| Date: | 2005-10-22 17:21:03 |
| Message-ID: | 2239.1130001663@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> Isn't there some way we can get the timer completion routine to be run
> by the signal thread instead? This coding seems pretty unreliable to me
> even without QQ's patch.
After further thought it seems like the right thing to do is to redesign
port/win32/timer.c so that it sets up a separate thread whose
responsibility is to wait for timeouts and deliver a SIGALRM signal back
to the main thread when they happen. It's probably a bit late to
consider doing this for 8.1 :-(
I've temporarily disabled Qingqing's patch by the expedient of removing
the UNBLOCKED_SIGNAL_QUEUE() check in the macro, so that the out-of-line
routine is always called (since we're going to do a kernel call anyway,
one extra layer of subroutine call doesn't seem very important). We can
put it back after fixing timer.c.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-22 17:38:43 | Re: [Slony1-general] Slony1_funcs broken with 8.1 |
| Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2005-10-22 16:17:12 | Re: Lifecycle management |