Re: parallel restore vs. windows - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: parallel restore vs. windows
Date
Msg-id 49453ECC.5030006@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: parallel restore vs. windows  (Andrew Chernow <ac@esilo.com>)
Responses Re: parallel restore vs. windows  (ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>)
Re: parallel restore vs. windows  ("Jaime Casanova" <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>)
List pgsql-hackers

Andrew Chernow wrote:
>
> If it previously worked without threads, than in theory a deep copy of
> the thread_arg should fix the core dump; especially if the non-windows
> fork() method works with this patch.  Maybe you can get away with only
> copying some of the members (trial-n-error), I don't think they are
> all being used in this context.  Nothing should be copied from within
> the thread itself.
>

I did this, but it turned out that the problem was a logic error that I
found once I had managed to get a working debugger. However, the Windows
thread code should now be more robust, so thanks to Andrew and Magnus
for the suggestions.

This version completes properly on Windows with the regression database.

Left to do:

. improve error checking
. memory leak cleanup
. code cleanup
. docs

I hope to have this done shortly.

cheers

andrew

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Hitoshi Harada"
Date:
Subject: Re: Windowing Function Patch Review -> Standard Conformance
Next
From: Mark Mielke
Date:
Subject: Re: Sync Rep: First Thoughts on Code