[email protected] wrote: > [email protected] wrote: >>> IMO using recursive mutexes means your code is broken. We introduced these >>> for >>> accesslog.c but in fact we could avoid them at zero cost. Also I don't see >>> the >>> relevance of libevent to this discussion. We use our own event mechanism and >>> it is more efficient than libevent. >> >> libevent is a dependency for the load balancer that I intend to propose >> for integration into the project after all the relevant dependencies >> have come in. >> >> There is a new version of this patch that provides an implementation on >> each platform or defers to the existing one (as per each platform's >> documentation). Untested except on POSIX and most of them seem pretty >> arcane anyway. >> >> ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/Ondrej-Kuznik-20170918-ITS8638-libldap_r-recursive-mutex.patch >> > It looks like glibc still doesn't define PTHREAD_MUTEX_RECURSIVE by default, > it requires compiling with either -D_GNU_SOURCE or -D_XOPEN_SOURCE. The > feature itself appears to be part of UNIX98. It's likely that all pthread > implementations available today support it, but it still seems a bit iffy. > OK, I see that current glibc defaults to _POSIX_C_SOURCE=200809 which includes __XOPEN_2K8. All of this came later than our rmutex.c which was written in 2006, so that explains where the need arose from. We should be safe pushing this in, go ahead.
-- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
