Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: parallel restore vs. windows

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Andrew Chernow <ac(at)esilo(dot)com>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: parallel restore vs. windows
Date: 2008-12-14 17:13:48
Message-ID: 49453ECC.5030006@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Chernow wrote:
>
> If it previously worked without threads, than in theory a deep copy of 
> the thread_arg should fix the core dump; especially if the non-windows 
> fork() method works with this patch.  Maybe you can get away with only 
> copying some of the members (trial-n-error), I don't think they are 
> all being used in this context.  Nothing should be copied from within 
> the thread itself.
>

I did this, but it turned out that the problem was a logic error that I 
found once I had managed to get a working debugger. However, the Windows 
thread code should now be more robust, so thanks to Andrew and Magnus 
for the suggestions.

This version completes properly on Windows with the regression database.

Left to do:

. improve error checking
. memory leak cleanup
. code cleanup
. docs

I hope to have this done shortly.

cheers

andrew

Attachment: parallel_restore_12.patch.gz
Description: application/x-gzip (16.1 KB)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Mark MielkeDate: 2008-12-14 17:57:24
Subject: Re: Sync Rep: First Thoughts on Code
Previous:From: Hitoshi HaradaDate: 2008-12-14 17:00:26
Subject: Re: Windowing Function Patch Review -> Standard Conformance

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group