Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch
От | Merlin Moncure |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 303E00EBDD07B943924382E153890E5434AA30@cuthbert.rcsinc.local обсуждение исходный текст |
Список | pgsql-hackers-win32 |
Steve Tibbett wrote: > Ah I see what you're saying, the polling isn't the WaitForSingleObject, > it's that the main thread that's going to have to poll something to see > if the thread that's doing the WaitForSingleObject has woken up and set > a signal or something. QueueUserAPCEx is perfect: it provides all the niceties of signaling without having to deal with 'polling' (main thread state checking), timeouts, loops, or any other such things. In fact, this will fit perfectly with the pipes implementation i.e. thread startup upon signal action, alter main backend thread, execute signal action (in main thread context), drop thread, with near instantaneous response. Looking at it from the top down, this is a 'push' not a 'pull' model. Also, this does not rely on generating an access violation, which would implementation of normal thread signaling (i/o completion ports) in the future more difficult. Assuming the implementation is robust, QueueUserAPCEx suits postgres perfectly. What license is QueueUserAPCEx distributed under? :) Is there any security or usability issues regarding installation of a kernel mode driver? Merlin
В списке pgsql-hackers-win32 по дате отправления: