"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
>> I can commit those changes tonight if I have the go-ahead. Or I can
>> wait till post-6.4. Your call.
> Go for it...that will at least get them off the list...
OK, the NOTIFY rewrite is checked in. We'll see what breaks, if
>> flock is a release stopper as far as I'm concerned, because the backend
>> *does not compile* on my platform without diking out that code.
Actually, it looks like Vadim replaced the flock() call with fcntl() a
few weeks ago, and I'd not noticed because I had a locally modified copy
of pqcomm.c. I don't know if fcntl(F_SETLK) is any more portable than
flock() --- it compiles on my platform, where flock() didn't, but that
proves little. So I went ahead and put in an autoconf test, only
checking for fcntl(F_SETLK) rather than flock(). I still think the
process-pid-in-a-textfile approach to locking is safer, but we can
leave that for the next release.
That's two items off the must-fix list and onto the are-there-bugs?
regards, tom lane
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tatsuo Ishii||Date: 1998-10-06 02:50:56|
|Subject: select * from ..;vacuum crashes |
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 1998-10-06 02:23:13|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] RE: [GENERAL] Long update query ? (also Re: [GENERAL] CNF vs. DNF)|