On 10/03/2012 09:23 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

A bigger problem with this is that it only fixes the issue for cases in
which somebody makes new threads of control with fork().  I believe that
issues involving multiple threads trying to use the same PGconn are at
least as widespread.  I'm not terribly excited about removing
functionality and adding overhead to protect against just one variant of
the problem.

                        

I had the same thought re threads.

cheers

andrew



--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to