| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Hiroyuki Yamada <yamada(at)kokolink(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Synchronization primitives (Was: Re: An example of bugs for Hot Standby) |
| Date: | 2010-01-20 19:07:00 |
| Message-ID: | 17505.1264014420@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> My point is that we should replace such polling loops with something
> non-polling, using wait/signal or semaphores or something. That gets
> quite a bit more complex. You'd probably still have the loop, but
> instead of pg_usleep() you'd call some new primitive function that waits
> until the shared variable changes.
Maybe someday --- it's certainly not something we need to mess with for
8.5. As Simon comments, getting it to work nicely in the face of corner
cases (like processes dying unexpectedly) could be a lot of work.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2010-01-20 19:09:47 | Re: [NOVICE] Python verison for build in config.pl (Win32) |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-01-20 18:49:03 | Re: Synchronization primitives (Was: Re: An example of bugs for Hot Standby) |