From: Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Comment patch for bgworker.c
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 20:13:25 -0600
Message-ID: <54D02EC5.1030505@BlueTreble.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoYkuN_ZTsROmqzDkAMpxbYvPKLNfV9-AGdD+qUUty76KA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <544AF3FB.5000604@BlueTreble.com>
<CA+TgmoYkuN_ZTsROmqzDkAMpxbYvPKLNfV9-AGdD+qUUty76KA@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
On 2/2/15 7:49 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 8:51 PM, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com> wrote:
>> The comment for the BackgroundWorkerSlot structure tripped me up reviewing
>> Robert's background worker patch; it made it clear that you need to use a
>> memory barrier before setting in_use, but normally you'd never need to worry
>> about that because RegisterDynamicBackgroundWorker() handles it for you.
>> Patch adds a comment to that effect.
>
> I vote to reject this patch. I think it's explaining something that
> doesn't really need to be explained, and shouldn't be explained like
> this even if it does. It adds a comment that reads "Note that
> RegisterDynamicBackgroundWorker() handles in_use correctly for you".
> But the long block comment of which it is a part is entirely devoted
> to explaining concerns internal to bgworker.c, from which I think it
> should be inferred that all of the public APIs in that file handle all
> of the things in that paragraph correctly (or are intended to,
> anyway).
At this point I don't remember what it was in your patch that tripped me
up on this, so I'm marking the patch rejected.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Comment patch for bgworker.c
In-Reply-To: <54D02EC5.1030505@BlueTreble.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox