Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
I'm not really in favor of this ... I think you are trying to make the
backend do something that will never work reliably.


Do we want to make this change for 8.1?

I don't want to do it at all.  The justification given is to allow the
backend to support multithreading introduced by an add-on library, which
is a hopeless cause.  Removing "static" from that variable declaration
is surely a cheap enough change, but what about the next request, and
the one after that?
Tom, I don't request that the backend should support multiple threads simultaneously. It's one thread at a time. I can't think of a "next request" in this direction. I'm very aware that the backend is single-threaded and that you have no intention to change that. Neither do I.

Having the stack_base public is actually useful for another purpose also. It can allow you to make assertions that check if an abitrary pointer is 'on stack' or not. The MemoryContextContains() could be made safer too by just returning false when the given pointer is between the stack_base and the current stack_pointer. Perhaps that could be added to the patch?

Regards,
Thomas Hallgren



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
      subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
      message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to