From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Unportable implementation of background worker start |
Date: | 2017-04-26 21:05:39 |
Message-ID: | 8322.1493240739@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> I'd still like to get something like your CLOEXEC patch applied
> independently however.
Here's an updated version of that, which makes use of our previous
conclusion that F_SETFD/FD_CLOEXEC are available everywhere except
Windows, and fixes some sloppy thinking about the EXEC_BACKEND case.
I went ahead and changed the call to epoll_create into epoll_create1.
I'm not too concerned about loss of portability there --- it seems
unlikely that many people are still using ten-year-old glibc, and
even less likely that any of them would be interested in running
current Postgres on their stable-unto-death platform. We could add
a configure test for epoll_create1 if you feel one's needed, but
I think it'd just be a waste of cycles.
I propose to push this into HEAD and 9.6 too.
regards, tom lane
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
fix-latch-and-waiteventset-inheritance.patch | text/x-diff | 8.3 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Petr Jelinek | 2017-04-26 21:41:51 | Re: Logical replication in the same cluster |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-04-26 20:12:21 | Re: [POC] hash partitioning |