| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: bgworker / SPI docs patches |
| Date: | 2015-07-30 20:20:38 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ3Erhc7BSfE4T04KJNeQ-TNwP0X7OX94R0L+Vt7GYSLQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 3:47 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> Hmm. worker_spi module uses bgw_main. Is that bad? Given that work_spi is
> supposedly an example or template that you copy-paste from when writing your
> own bgworker, we should make sure it follows the best practice. Also, I note
> that worker_spi doesn't memset(0) its BackgroundWorker struct, so any
> uninitialized fields will contain garbage. Including bgw_library_name and
> bgw_function_name. That seems bad.
Yeah, that stuff is bad.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dmitry Igrishin | 2015-08-02 19:02:29 | Confused by example in 13.2.2 |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2015-07-30 07:47:03 | Re: bgworker / SPI docs patches |