Dave Page wrote: > Did anyone get a chance to think about this? I'd like to fix this for > 8.1, but it should also make life easy with the new libpq based ODBC > driver improvements if I can produce an appropriate patch sooner rather > than later!
I have thought about it and it needs to be addressed before 8.1 final, but I don't have time at the moment. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Regards, Dave. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Page > > Sent: 21 July 2005 15:00 > > To: PostgreSQL-development > > Subject: [HACKERS] --enable-thread-safety on Win32 > > > > I've been looking into fixing the --enable-thread-safety option on > > Windows. At the moment, we have some simple pthread emulation that > > may be used in libpq if --enable-thread-safety is used. The Makefile > > is slightly broken, however this should be easy to fix (properly) > > for someone more proficient with Make than I am. > > > > Thread safety cannot currently be enabled through configure on > > Windows for two reasons however: > > > > - If the POSIX Signals test fails, configure fails. We have our own > > signal code on Windows, so it's no surprise that configure fails > > this test. This is easily fixed with the addition of > > ' -a "$PORTNAME" != "win32"' to the test at line 1179 of > > configure.in. Why are signals needed for thread safety anyway? > > > > - The thread_test program fails to even compile on Windows. > > > > This second problem is the main issue, the main point being that our > > pthread emulation doesn't implement enough of the API for the test > > program to run, only that that's needed for libpq. To fix this we > > must either convert it to use Windows threads, use a full > > implementation of the pthread library, or implement more of the API > > ourselves. the first option will obviously take some effort, and > > probably be best implemented as a Windows specific version of the > > test program. The second introduces extra dependencies, at worst at > > runtime, at best just build time. The third is also additional, > > potentially significant work. > > > > However, fixing this issue using any of those methods seems somewhat > > pointless. All the versions of Windows that we support are > > thread-safe anyway (and this doesn't vary like it can on Unixes) > > and given that threaded apps are the standard on Windows, I don't > > suppose this is likely to change in future releases. It therefore > > seems to me that the sensible course of action is to skip the thread > > test altogether on Windows. > > > > Sound reasonable? > > > > Regards, Dave > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
