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

Re: Win32 semaphore patch

From: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,"Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>
Cc: <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Win32 semaphore patch
Date: 2006-04-20 18:09:49
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-patches
> > Attached is a patch for Win32 semaphore reimplementation per 
> > discussion with Tom and Magnus.
> The trickiest part of the sysv and posix implementations is 
> making sure that any kernel resources represented by the 
> semaphores will go away at appropriate times.  There are two 
> cases to worry about:
> 1. Backend crash while postmaster stays alive: postmaster 
> will get to execute the on_shmem_exit() callback after all 
> the backends are gone, and that can clean 'em up.
> 2. postmaster crashes: we'd like the semas to go away 
> automatically when the last backend goes away.  If this 
> doesn't happen, then there has to be logic to recycle 
> leftover semas when the postmaster is next started.
> Most of the ugliness in sysv_sema.c is because it has to do "manual"
> cleanup per #2.
> I dunno much about Windows, and it may be that your code is 
> already OK on this score.  I'm just pointing it out as 
> something that has to be considered.  Some comments in the 
> code about how this works wouldn't be a bad idea.

For #2, yes, the semaphores will go away when the last process holding a
HANDLE to it goes away. For #1, the code seems to handle that right?



pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: David WheelerDate: 2006-04-20 18:17:19
Subject: Re: Suggestion: Which Binary?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-04-20 16:27:50
Subject: Re: Win32 semaphore patch

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group