On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 07:26:52AM -0700, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > Konstantin,
> Not if you do sem_unlink() immediately, AFAIK. And that's what PG does. So > the window of opportunity for the leakage is quite small, much smaller than > for SYSV primitives. Sorry for missing your status update message, I've > missed it somehow. True, but if your process architecture supports that, you can also put unnamed process-shared semaphores into a piece of shared memory (pad sem_t to a cache line if contention is expected). This is more natural API use (fully avoiding the leak) and uses less memory. It has been supported for a long time, at least since FreeBSD 9.0. Process-shared mutexes, condition variables, reader/writer locks, etc. are available in FreeBSD 11 but use more memory (a 1-page object per synchronization object), somewhat like named semaphores. -- Jilles Tjoelker _______________________________________________ freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
