Re: libpq thread safety
| От | Manfred Spraul |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: libpq thread safety |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 400191C4.4090403@colorfullife.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: libpq thread safety (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: libpq thread safety
Re: libpq thread safety |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: >Wait a minute. I am *not* buying into any proposal that we need to >support ENABLE_THREAD_SAFETY on machines where libc is not thread-safe. >We have other things to do than adopt an open-ended commitment to work >around threading bugs on obsolete platforms. I don't believe that any >sane application programmer is going to try to implement a >multi-threaded app on such a platform anyway. > I'd agree - convince Bruce and I'll replace the mutexes in thread.c with #error. But I think libpq should support a mutex around kerberos (or at least fail at runtime) - right now it's too easy to corrupt the kerberos authentication state. -- Manfred
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: