Re: Proposal: Add a callback data parameter to GetNamedDSMSegment

From: Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal: Add a callback data parameter to GetNamedDSMSegment
Date: 2025-12-12 21:56:07
Message-ID: CAA5RZ0uLQCK3A13TVEUf3M_Xbg9G=z6vBp3egw1QnPdZFOVkEQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > [...]
> > - LWLockInitialize(&dsm->lck, LWLockNewTrancheId("test_dsm_registry"));
> > + LWLockInitialize(&dsm->lck, LWLockNewTrancheId((char *) arg));
> > dsm->val = 0;
> > [...]
> >
> > instead of creating a new test? For the other GetNamedDSMSegment calls,
> > I'll pass NULL to the void * and hard code the tranche name in the init
> > callback.
>
> I think we should verify the pointer value more directly. For example, we
> could pass something like (uintptr_t) 0x12345 via the callback argument and
> then verify it's the same in the callback.

This is better than what I had earlier where I was testing that a string
was passed correctly. See v6.

--
Sami Imseih
Amazon Web Services(AWS)

Attachment Content-Type Size
v6-0001-Add-init_callback_arg-parameter-to-GetNamedDSMSeg.patch application/octet-stream 8.1 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Manni Wood 2025-12-12 23:09:05 Re: Speed up COPY FROM text/CSV parsing using SIMD
Previous Message Aleksander Alekseev 2025-12-12 21:47:30 Re: [PATCH] pg_bsd_indent: improve formatting of multiline comments