| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Shridhar Daithankar" <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in>, "Claudio Natoli" <claudio(dot)natoli(at)memetrics(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Threads vs Processes |
| Date: | 2003-09-25 23:15:00 |
| Message-ID: | 4612.1064531700@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32 |
"Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com> writes:
> All TLS variables *must* be static (or implicitly static
> through extern, i.e. no 'auto' variables)
I assume you mean static as in not-auto, rather than static as in
not-global. Otherwise we have a problem here.
> and their addresses can not be
> assumed to be constant.
Surely the addresses can be assumed constant within a thread. Otherwise
we have a problem here too.
> Taking addresses of TLS variables should be considered illegal,
Sorry, no can accept that restriction.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Myron Scott | 2003-09-25 23:19:21 | Re: Threads vs Processes |
| Previous Message | Robert Treat | 2003-09-25 20:14:36 | Re: PL contribution guidelines? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Myron Scott | 2003-09-25 23:19:21 | Re: Threads vs Processes |
| Previous Message | Keith Bottner | 2003-09-25 20:03:57 | Re: [HACKERS] Threads vs Processes |