Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> Actually, why bother with init_dump_utils at all?
>>>
>
>
>> Well, the Windows reference I have suggests TlsAlloc() needs to be
>> called early in the initialisation process ...
>>
>
> How early is early? The proposed call sites for init_dump_utils seem
> already long past the point where any libc-level infrastructure would
> think it is "initialization" time.
>
Well, I think at least it needs to be done where other threads won't be
calling it at the same time.
cheers
andrew