| 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 |
| 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 |