Re: fork()-safety, thread-safety

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Nico Williams <nico(at)cryptonector(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: fork()-safety, thread-safety
Date: 2017-10-05 22:53:00
Message-ID: 20171005225300.ha5gfkdbxk4zktku@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2017-10-05 18:49:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> (There's certainly an argument to be made that no-one cares about
> platforms without thread support anymore. But I'm unconvinced that
> rewriting existing code that works fine is the most productive
> way to exploit such a choice if we were to make it.)

Yea, that's pretty much what I'm thinking too.

- Andres

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2017-10-05 23:59:40 Re: fork()-safety, thread-safety
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-10-05 22:49:22 Re: fork()-safety, thread-safety