Re: LWLock/ShmemIndex startup question - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: LWLock/ShmemIndex startup question
Date
Msg-id 200401230456.i0N4ue801860@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: LWLock/ShmemIndex startup question  (Claudio Natoli <claudio.natoli@memetrics.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Claudio Natoli wrote:
> 
> 
> Tom Lane writes:
> > [cvs is your friend...]  It appears to have been added as part of the
> > MinGW porting work last May.  I don't have much faith in it; as far as
> > I heard the MinGW port never got further than making the client-side
> > code work, and so this file has no real-world testing.
> 
> FWIW, I've done a code walk-through, and it looks ok (lack of real-world
> testing notwithstanding), and actually does use the Win32 sema set. The only
> real problem is that it calls ShmemInitStruct in semget, which ultimately
> gets us into bootstrap hell (without native spinlocks, at least).
> 
> Also, as far as using it in the "hardware independent" version of spin-locks
> go, it makes kernel calls, which, as spin.c comments: "is too slow to be
> very useful".

Yep, native gcc TAS assembler should work fine on MinGW with gcc.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: LWLock/ShmemIndex startup question
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Permissions and PGSQL