Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | ohp@pyrenet.fr |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...) |
Date | |
Msg-id | Pine.UW2.4.53.0309032204520.6699@server.pyrenet.fr Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...) (Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>) |
Responses |
Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)
Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...) |
List | pgsql-hackers |
FWIW, I do confirm, on dual XEON with JT enabled On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Larry Rosenman wrote: > Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 14:53:39 -0500 > From: Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> > To: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>, ohp@pyrenet.fr > Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled > ...) > > >From UnixWare: > > $ cc -O -Kpthread test_thread.c -o test_thread -lsocket -lnsl > UX:acomp: WARNING: "test_thread.c", line 60: argument #3 incompatible with > prototype: pthread_create() > UX:acomp: WARNING: "test_thread.c", line 61: argument #3 incompatible with > prototype: pthread_create() > $ ./test_thread > Your functions are all thread-safe > $ > > --On Wednesday, September 03, 2003 15:36:53 -0400 Bruce Momjian > <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> wrote: > > > ohp@pyrenet.fr wrote: > >> > Olivier PRENANT wrote: > >> > > >> It's ok to assume thread-safety, as the SCO developer (Kean > >> > > >> Johnston) asked the threads guys, and he said that the libc stuff > >> > > >> is thread-safe so they don't have to have 2 different versions in > >> > > >> libc. > >> > > > > >> > > If any one can write a program that can prove anything (I can't), I'm > >> > > willing to test it here on a bi-pro (bi PIII and bi-XEON with JT > >> > > enabled) running uw713. > >> > > Maybe it will end the discussion and make a point in either way. So > >> > > that we (you?) can move on with the other unixware patches. > >> > > >> > You don't need a SMP machine to test threads. You just need one thread > >> > to do the function call, then another to do the function call and see > >> > if the two pointers are different. They calls don't have to happen at > >> > the same time. Ideally you could make call in the two threads with > >> > different arguments, then after both calls are completed, test that the > >> > two static areas have the proper _different_ values. > >> > > >> > > >> Ok, I don't know much about threads; would you write a simple program for > >> us to test? > > > > OK, done, and attached. It is also now in CVS as > > src/tools/test_thread_funcs.c. > > > > In hindsight, I should have done this long ago. However, it only tests > > the thread-safety of functions. It does not completely test your > > threading capability. > > > > I would like every operating system that supports thread-safety to run > > this program and report back the results. > > > > -- Olivier PRENANT Tel: +33-5-61-50-97-00 (Work) 6, Chemin d'Harraud Turrou +33-5-61-50-97-01 (Fax) 31190 AUTERIVE +33-6-07-63-80-64 (GSM) FRANCE Email: ohp@pyrenet.fr ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Make your life a dream, make your dream a reality. (St Exupery)
pgsql-hackers by date: