Re: [HACKERS] Open 6.4 items
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Open 6.4 items |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5432.907642176@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Open 6.4 items ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes: >> I can commit those changes tonight if I have the go-ahead. Or I can >> wait till post-6.4. Your call. > Go for it...that will at least get them off the list... OK, the NOTIFY rewrite is checked in. We'll see what breaks, if anything. >> flock is a release stopper as far as I'm concerned, because the backend >> *does not compile* on my platform without diking out that code. Actually, it looks like Vadim replaced the flock() call with fcntl() a few weeks ago, and I'd not noticed because I had a locally modified copy of pqcomm.c. I don't know if fcntl(F_SETLK) is any more portable than flock() --- it compiles on my platform, where flock() didn't, but that proves little. So I went ahead and put in an autoconf test, only checking for fcntl(F_SETLK) rather than flock(). I still think the process-pid-in-a-textfile approach to locking is safer, but we can leave that for the next release. That's two items off the must-fix list and onto the are-there-bugs? list... regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: