Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)
От | Lee Kindness |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 16212.20497.397807.832014@kelvin.csl.co.uk обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)
Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane writes:> Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes:> > On the other hand, things like, getpwnam, strtok, etc have non-thread-safe>> APIs. They can never be made thread-safe. The *_r versions of these functions> > are standardized and required.If they don't exist then the platform simply> > does not support threads.> > This statement is simply false. Aplatform can build thread-safe> versions of those "unsafe" APIs if it makes the return values point> to thread-local storage. Some BSDs do it that way. Accordingly, any> simplistic "we must have _r to be thread-safe" approach is> incorrect. No, it's not. Using the _r functions on such systems is BETTER because the API is clean and the function can be implmented in a reentrant and thread-safe fashion wuithout the need for thread local storage or mutex locking. L.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: