Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1d2ixL-0004H0-Uo for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 18:43:28 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1d2ixL-0002EY-HW for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 18:43:27 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1d2ixD-00020R-R9 for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 18:43:19 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1d2ixA-0000X4-I0 for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 18:43:19 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v3OIhBpZ001785; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 14:43:11 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Andres Freund cc: Craig Ringer , Amit Kapila , pgsql-hackers Subject: Re: OK, so culicidae is *still* broken In-reply-to: <20170424180848.gxaw44jwag7doqz5@alap3.anarazel.de> References: <3667.1492291494@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20170415213017.co7gkjlbcy44zlmw@alap3.anarazel.de> <4180.1492292046@sss.pgh.pa.us> <6309.1492611331@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20170419153151.y5bfp4kdo377ycps@alap3.anarazel.de> <20170420192500.gaagaaopc2kjmort@alap3.anarazel.de> <20170424180848.gxaw44jwag7doqz5@alap3.anarazel.de> Comments: In-reply-to Andres Freund message dated "Mon, 24 Apr 2017 11:08:48 -0700" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1783.1493059391.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 14:43:11 -0400 Message-ID: <1784.1493059391@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org Andres Freund writes: > On 2017-04-24 23:14:40 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote: >> In the long run we'll probably be forced toward threading or far pointers. > I'll vote for removing the windows port, before going for that. And I'm > not even joking. Me too. We used to *have* that kind of code, ie relative pointers into the shmem segment, and it was a tremendous notational mess and very bug-prone. I do not wish to go back. (We have accepted that kind of overhead for DSM segments, but the intention I think is to allow only very trivial data structures in the DSM segments. Losing compiler pointer type checking for data structures like the lock or PGPROC tables would be horrid.) regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers