On Fri, 3 May 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> But what we must *not* do is allow a new postmaster to start while the
> old backends are still running; that would mean two sets of backends
> running without contact with each other, which would be fatal for data
> integrity. The SysV API lets us detect th
This small patch reloads dynamic libraries whose modification time is
greater than that at the time it was initially loaded. This means that
connections do not need to be reinitialised when a library is recompiled.
There is a problem with this, however: if dlopen()'ing the new patch
fails, the fu
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tom Lane
> Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 6:07 PM
> To: mlw
> Cc: Marc G. Fournier; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] HEADS UP: Win32/OS2/BeOS native ports
>
>
> Rather than propagating the SysV se
Upon doing some inspection of apache 2.x, it seems that me making a SysV
Windows .DLL for PostgreSQL, while a cool project, would be unnecessary.
The APR (Apache Portable Runtime) seems to have all the necessary support. The
problem is that it has its own API.
We should find a way to extract the
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> "Hiroshi Inoue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If you'd not like to change the behavior, I would change it, OK ?
>
> To what? I don't want to simply undo the 7.2 change.
What I'm thinking is the following makeshift f
mlw wrote:
>
> Upon doing some inspection of apache 2.x, it seems that me making a SysV
> Windows .DLL for PostgreSQL, while a cool project, would be unnecessary.
>
> The APR (Apache Portable Runtime) seems to have all the necessary support. The
> problem is that it has its own API.
>
> We shou
Justin Clift wrote:
>
> mlw wrote:
> >
> > Upon doing some inspection of apache 2.x, it seems that me making a SysV
> > Windows .DLL for PostgreSQL, while a cool project, would be unnecessary.
> >
> > The APR (Apache Portable Runtime) seems to have all the necessary support. The
> > problem is th
"Joel Burton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Rather than propagating the SysV semaphore API still further, why don't
>> we kill it now? (I'm willing to keep the shmem API, however.)
> Would this have the benefit of allow PostgreSQL to work properly in BSD
> jails, since lack of really working Sy
"Hiroshi Inoue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you'd not like to change the behavior, I would change it, OK ?
>>
>> To what? I don't want to simply undo the 7.2 change.
> What I'm thinking is the following makeshift fix.
> I expect it solves Ron's case though I'm not sure.
> Returning UPDATE
Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This small patch reloads dynamic libraries whose modification time is
> greater than that at the time it was initially loaded. This means that
> connections do not need to be reinitialised when a library is recompiled.
Is that a good idea? It's easy to
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Upon doing some inspection of apache 2.x, it seems that me making a SysV
> Windows .DLL for PostgreSQL, while a cool project, would be unnecessary.
> The APR (Apache Portable Runtime) seems to have all the necessary support.
Does it? AFAICT they intend to provi
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Upon doing some inspection of apache 2.x, it seems that me making a SysV
> > Windows .DLL for PostgreSQL, while a cool project, would be unnecessary.
>
> > The APR (Apache Portable Runtime) seems to have all the necessary support.
>
> Does
Matthew Kirkwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 3 May 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The SysV API lets us detect that case, but I don't see any
>> equally good way to do it if we are using anonymous shared memory.
> It's a hack (and has slight security implications), but you
> could just allow t
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We could provide a PGSemaphore based on an APR mutex and a counter,
> but I'm not sure of the performance impact. We may want to implement a
> "generic" semaphore like this and one optimized for platforms which we
> have development resources.
Once we have the in
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> "Hiroshi Inoue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If you'd not like to change the behavior, I would change it, OK ?
> >>
> >> To what? I don't want to simply undo the 7.2 change.
>
> > What I'm thinking is the following
I have just committed changes to create a platform-independent internal
API for semaphores, along the lines discussed yesterday.
At this point, the Darwin (Mac OS X), BeOS, and QNX4 ports are probably
broken. I will fix the Darwin port (probably not till tomorrow though);
volunteers to clean up
> "Joel Burton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Rather than propagating the SysV semaphore API still further, why don't
> >> we kill it now? (I'm willing to keep the shmem API, however.)
>
> > Would this have the benefit of allow PostgreSQL to work properly in BSD
> > jails, since lack of really
17 matches
Mail list logo
