Re: [HACKERS] Hardwired MAXBACKENDS limit could be history

2001-01-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
> It would require only very minor changes in the main backend code to > eliminate entirely the hard-wired upper bound MAXBACKENDS. This would > be nice since there'd never be any need to recompile in order to > increase the soft limit MaxBackends (-N). However I see that the > SysV-semaphore em

RE: [HACKERS] Hardwired MAXBACKENDS limit could be history

2001-01-26 Thread Mikheev, Vadim
> > Conditional variables seem to be more portable > > Really? Which standard are they specified in? POSIX - they are in pthread library (eg man pthread_cond_init). For sem_init I see in man (on Solaris and AIX): ENOSYS The sem_init() function is not supported what is exactly I've got on AIX

Re: [HACKERS] Hardwired MAXBACKENDS limit could be history

2001-01-26 Thread Tom Lane
"Mikheev, Vadim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> What I'd like to look at sometime soon is using POSIX semaphores >> instead of SysV semaphores. But we need stateful semaphores, >> not signals. > Conditional variables seem to be more portable Really? Which standard are they specified in? I hav

RE: [HACKERS] Hardwired MAXBACKENDS limit could be history

2001-01-26 Thread Mikheev, Vadim
> > Did you ever consider remove per-backend semaphores at all? > > We use them to sleep waiting for lock (ie when someone awake > > us by changing our semaphore) - why don't use sigpause and > > some signal? > > That'll fail if the signal arrives before the sigpause(), no? Ops, you're right. >

Re: [HACKERS] Hardwired MAXBACKENDS limit could be history

2001-01-26 Thread Tom Lane
"Mikheev, Vadim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Did you ever consider remove per-backend semaphores at all? > We use them to sleep waiting for lock (ie when someone awake > us by changing our semaphore) - why don't use sigpause and > some signal? That'll fail if the signal arrives before the sigpa

RE: [HACKERS] Hardwired MAXBACKENDS limit could be history

2001-01-26 Thread Mikheev, Vadim
> I'm not thinking about getting this done in time for 7.1, but I think > it'd be a nice cleanup for 7.2. > > Bruce, a TODO item please: > * Remove compile-time upper limit on number of backends > (MAXBACKENDS) Did you ever consider remove per-backend semaphores at all? We use them to sleep w

[HACKERS] Hardwired MAXBACKENDS limit could be history

2001-01-26 Thread Tom Lane
It would require only very minor changes in the main backend code to eliminate entirely the hard-wired upper bound MAXBACKENDS. This would be nice since there'd never be any need to recompile in order to increase the soft limit MaxBackends (-N). However I see that the SysV-semaphore emulation co