Re: Extending SQL with C, shared library problem
От | Shawn Garbett |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Extending SQL with C, shared library problem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20050720220316.5615.qmail@web54407.mail.yahoo.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Extending SQL with C, shared library problem (Shawn Garbett <shawn_garbett@yahoo.com>) |
Список | pgsql-novice |
--- Shawn Garbett <shawn_garbett@yahoo.com> wrote: > --- Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > > Shawn Garbett <shawn_garbett@yahoo.com> writes: > > > I've got C code written to store a value in the > > > context of an active connection using a hash. It > > > worked until I added some semaphores to control > > memory > > > reads/writes to the shared resource. This is on > > SLES9 > > > Linux box running a 2.6.5 kernel. > > Okay, I'm offically confused then. I thought the PID > was unique among active connections. Then wouldn't > the > hash be accessible from multiple processes and not > just one? Or does the shared library get loaded > separately for each process? If so, then there is no > need at all for a hash table, and a simple global > int > would do. Maybe the whole thing is just overkill. Just rewrote it. Trival, like you said. It works perfectly with just having a single global int. I just didn't understand the process/thread model inside the extensional C under Postgresql. Great!!!! We only have two issues about moving away from Oracle now: 1) load testing (this shouldn't be a problem, we currently need about 4TPS, max 10TPS). 2) Reporting tools. In the perfect world, a single tool could write fancy reports versus both PostGres and Oracle. We've yet to find that tool. New thread maybe? Shawn __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления: