| From: | Marsh Ray <marsh-pg(at)mysteray(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Committing Resources to Win32 |
| Date: | 2003-11-07 11:45:49 |
| Message-ID: | 3FAB85ED.1070506@mysteray.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers-win32 |
Claudio Natoli wrote:
>> Specifically, I believe and through conversations with several Win32
>>
>>
>programmers I know, that using create process is a bad idea and that we
>should move to a threaded model (at least for Win32).
>
>CreateProcess appears to be the method the core developers have decided
>upon. Unfortunately, and speaking from experience, unless either the
>decision to use MingW as a build environment is reviewed (as opposed to
>VC++, for instance), or MingW "soon" supports thread local storage
>declspecs, a threaded implementation would be just too difficult to
>integrate cleanly with the existing source base.
>
I'm trying to understand this. Is it that the existing code references
static data in so many places that it impractical to move all that into
a structures?
You could put a structure high up on the stack of each thread and pass
down a pointer to it, or use a hash on thread id to reference the data.
Structuring those globals would probably flush out some, er,
"undocumented enhancements".
It looks like the Apache group put a lot of work into modularizing their
execution model for their 2.0.x. It has certainly made their app a
serious choice under Windows.
- Marsh
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2003-11-07 15:01:38 | Re: Committing Resources to Win32 |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2003-11-07 10:23:05 | Re: Committing Resources to Win32 |