From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Victor Spirin <v(dot)spirin(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Sometimes the output to the stdout in Windows disappears |
Date: | 2020-10-17 18:44:37 |
Message-ID: | 132799.1602960277@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> What bothers me is:
>> There must be a call to *WSACleanup* for each successful call to
>> WSAStartup
>> <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/desktop/api/winsock/nf-winsock-wsastartup>.
> Yeah, that is a very odd statement. Surely, the Windows kernel manages
> to cope if a program crashes without having done that. So what exactly
> is the downside of intentionally not doing it?
A bit of grepping showed me that the backend, initdb, and pg_regress
all call WSAStartup without ever doing WSACleanup, and we've seen no
ill effects from that. So it seems clear that this documentation can
safely be ignored.
I propose the attached patch. If this doesn't cause buildfarm problems,
perhaps we should back-patch it.
BTW, I notice that libpq is asking WSAStartup for Winsock version 1.1,
which is remarkably ancient. Almost everyplace else is asking for
version 2.2, which has been current for a decade or two. Shouldn't
we update that? (It occurs to me to wonder if this in itself is
some kind of problem; I wonder how well Winsock works when there are
requests for different API versions in the same program.)
regards, tom lane
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
remove-WSACleanup-calls.patch | text/x-diff | 3.5 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2020-10-17 19:21:34 | Re: jit and explain nontext |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-10-17 16:28:51 | Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId for pg_catalog.pg_stat_activity view? |