Re: PGconn thread safety

On 7 Feb 2003 at 14:40, ahoward wrote:

> On Fri, 7 Feb 2003, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
>
> > On Friday 07 February 2003 12:44 pm, you wrote:
> > > Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> > > That's the theory anyway. I believe it actually is free of unsafe uses
> > > of static variables. However, someone recently pointed out that it uses
> > > some libc routines that probably aren't thread-safe; so there's some
> > > cleanup yet to do before we can claim real thread safety.
> > Well, I ran a mutlithreaded test where around 30 connections were hammered =
> > in=20
> > a mutlihtreaded servers using libpq for 100,000 transactions. I didn't noti=
> > ce=20
> > any data inconsistency.=20
> meaning your connections had no semaphore (or other) type thread protection?

I had. But each pgConn object was used in a separate thread. All connections
were created before any threads. So that issue of non-thread safe function to
fetch local user names did not arise, I guess..

Bye
Shridhar

--
The sight of death frightens them [Earthers]. -- Kras the Klingon, "Friday's
Child", stardate 3497.2