Re: [HACKERS] OK, so culicidae is *still* broken

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Craig Ringer
Тема Re: [HACKERS] OK, so culicidae is *still* broken
Дата
Msg-id CAMsr+YG3ndkagR5OTSfPG8+aXU-oJ7C=Hg12m7-fw_q9wY8RkA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] OK, so culicidae is *still* broken  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения


On 25 Apr. 2017 02:51, "Andres Freund" <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
On 2017-04-24 11:08:48 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2017-04-24 23:14:40 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> > In the long run we'll probably be forced toward threading or far pointers.
>
> I'll vote for removing the windows port, before going for that.  And I'm
> not even joking.

Just to clarify: I'm talking about far pointers here, not threading.

Yeah, I'm pretty unimpressed that the accepted solution seems to be to return to the early '90s.

Why don't platforms offer any sensible way to reserve a virtual address range at process creation time?

It looks like you need a minimal loader process that rebases its self in memory if it finds its self loaded in the desired area, then maps the required memory range and loads the real process. Hard to imagine that not causing more problems than it solves.

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start
Следующее
От: Masahiko Sawada
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.