> > (2) the killer function is PGSemaphoreReset(). There is no direct 
> > function for this in Win32 either.
> 
> If you can do PGSemaphoreTryLock, then Reset need only be a 
> loop around it (cf. posix_sema.c).  In current usage Reset 
> doesn't have to be very efficient at all, because it's only 
> used during backend startup to bring the semaphore to a known state.
> 
> > (1) semctl(SETVAL, val=0) - there is no other "val" than 
> zero is used;
> 
> Really?  Better look again.
> 
> If you think the SysV interface is baroque (which I don't 
> disagree with), then you should just get rid of it entirely 
> and implement pg_sema.h directly atop the Windows primitives. 
>  I don't have a lot of sympathy for "let's implement just 
> part of SysV because I don't like that other part".  There is 
> no contract saying that sysv_sema.c might not start using 
> SysV features it doesn't use today.

That's what I was thinking when I said "option 3". It shouldn't be *too*
hard, and much cleaner.

//Magnus

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to