> > (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