RE: LinuxThreads, FAQ needs updating for 2.x

[Herman Meerlo <herman.meerlo@cmg.nl>]

Hi Cristopher,

you are correct that I had problems with thread support, but it was not on
Linux and I seriously suspect the Compaq TRU64 implementation of the pthread
library because we have seen some more problems with that. But I would
definitely recommend : do not use thread support because nobody can assure
that it will work correctly with threads.

/Herman

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher D. Audley [mailto:Christopher.D.Audley@jhu.edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 18:40
> To: openldap-software@OpenLDAP.org
> Subject: LinuxThreads, FAQ needs updating for 2.x
> 
> 
> I've been trying to nail down what the status of OpenLDAP and
> LinuxThreads is.
> 
> The FAQ is very clear on OpenLDAP 1.x and pre-emptive threads,
> DONT DO IT.
> 
> However, nobody has gone back and updated this message for 
> 2.x.  I can't
> seem to find the message that says 'I'm an OpenLDAP expert, I 
> know what
> the hell I'm talking about and (yes/no) you ( can/can't ) use
> LinuxThreads and OpenLDAP'.
> 
> Amoung highly informative messages, I found a message in -devel from
> Kurt dated August 1999 explaining that the problem with 
> LinuxThreads is
> that signal handling is broken ( not spec compliant ).  It suggested
> that using the BINDv8 event library might be the way to go.  
> I couldn't
> find a follow up to this indicating that LinuxThreads had 
> corrected its
> problems or that a suitable replacement had been found (no further
> mention of BINDv8).
> 
> In October 2000, Julio Fernandez says threads wont work prior to 2.0,
> try upgrading to 2.0.6 or recompile the 1.x server being used.  He
> doesn't specifically say that 2.x works with pre-emptive threading.  I
> hate to be pendantic, but I also don't want to get slammed for reading
> in between the lines and being wrong.
> 
> The release notes for 2.0 list amoung the enhancements 
> 'Thread Pooling',
> but again, this doesn't necessarilly scream "Re-engineered for
> pre-emptive threading!" which I think would be something to scream
> about.
> 
> On this list you see a lot of conflicting answers to the regular
> periodic request for information on LinuxThreads and OpenLDAP.
> Recently, sobral@sj.univali.br assured that LinuxThreads and OpenLDAP
> 1.2.11 is fine, despite the FAQ to the contrary.  Then two 
> weeks later,
> herman.meerlo@cmg.nl states as part of his question that they have
> definitely seen problems with OpenLDAP and thread support
> 
> Can someone provide the finally, definitive answer.   And 
> please updated
> the FAQ.
> 
> Thanks
> Chris
>