helps.
Keith
-Original Message-
From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 11:57 AM
To: Keith Bottner
Cc: 'Tom Lane'; 'Claudio Natoli'; 'Robert Treat';
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Thre
Keith Bottner wrote:
> Typically variables that you want to be per-thread are stored in what
> Microsoft calls Thread Local Storage (TLS). Variables that you want shared
> you can just treat as globals and statics with the appropriate threading
> synchronization primitives. With Windows 2000 and la
Momjian; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Threads vs Processes (was: NuSphere and PostgreSQL
for windows)
Claudio Natoli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> FWIW, I've got a threaded version of the WIN32_DEV branch more or less
> "running" (it is
Tom Lane wrote:
Claudio Natoli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
How are you dealing with the issue of wanting some static variables to
be per-thread and others not?
To be perfectly honest, I'm still trying to familiarize myself with the code
sufficiently well so that I can tell which varia
Claudio Natoli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> How are you dealing with the issue of wanting some static variables to
>> be per-thread and others not?
> To be perfectly honest, I'm still trying to familiarize myself with the code
> sufficiently well so that I can tell which variables need to be per
> Claudio Natoli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > FWIW, I've got a threaded version of the WIN32_DEV branch more or less
> > "running" (it is a terrible hack job, so NO, no patches... yet :-), as a
> > proof of concept. Still a work in progress (ok, I've qualified it
enough),
> > but it is showing
Claudio Natoli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> FWIW, I've got a threaded version of the WIN32_DEV branch more or less
> "running" (it is a terrible hack job, so NO, no patches... yet :-), as a
> proof of concept. Still a work in progress (ok, I've qualified it enough),
> but it is showing enough prom
Tom Lane writes:
> BTW, I've been wondering lately if we'd not be better off to look at
> using threading in the Windows port, if it'd help us get around the
> fork/exec data transfer problem. I'm not sure that it would,
> mind you, but if it would give an answer it might be a lot less painful
t
