Re: Strange failure in LWLock on skink in REL9_5_STABLE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Strange failure in LWLock on skink in REL9_5_STABLE
Date
Msg-id 29802.1537505011@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Strange failure in LWLock on skink in REL9_5_STABLE  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: Strange failure in LWLock on skink in REL9_5_STABLE  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 4:06 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Why would we fix it rather than just removing it?

> I assumed we wouldn't remove an extern C function extension code
> somewhere might use.  Though admittedly I'd be surprised if anyone
> used this one.

Unless it looks practical to support this behavior in the Windows
and SysV cases, I think we should get rid of it rather than expend
effort on supporting it for just some platforms.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Changing the setting of wal_sender_timeout per standby
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal for Signal Detection Refactoring