| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Let's drop support for named POSIX semaphores |
| Date: | 2026-11-02 13:33:25 |
| Message-ID: | 3f87080b-11ff-4115-afeb-789f4fee2805@eisentraut.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 26.10.26 16:42, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> writes:
>> There were some recent discussions about removing the requirement of
>> SysV IPC to allow macOS sandboxing mechanisms to be used. These
>> discussions mainly focus on SysV shared memory, which is currently a
>> hard requirement, but I would expect that switching to non-SysV
>> semaphores would be part of such an undertaking. So I think adding
>> another hard requirement on SysV IPC would not be preferable.
>
> Named POSIX semaphores are not a credible replacement for SysV
> semaphores, because of their performance issues (which are just
> as real on macOS as anywhere else). So I think the direction we'd
> have to go in to make that happen is to replace all the semaphore
> stuff with futexes or some other low-level primitive, as Munro
> speculated about in one of the threads I cited.
Ok, I'm withdrawing my comment.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2026-11-02 13:40:45 | Re: [PATCH] dynahash.c refactoring |
| Previous Message | vignesh C | 2026-11-02 13:25:49 | Re: WAL record CRC calculated incorrectly because of underlying buffer modification |