[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: RE24 testing call #3 (2.4.43) LMDB RE0.9 testing call #3 (0.9.17)



Volker Lendecke wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:09:51AM +0000, Howard Chu wrote:
Unfortunately, PTHREAD_MUTEX_ROBUST_NP is an enum, not a macro, so
#ifdef won't work to detect it.

The attached patch should work. Please report back; I won't merge it
unless we know it actually helps.

Not sure you're aware, but there's RHEL5 (and thus Centos5 I
believe) versions where glibc announces robust mutexes but
the kernel is buggy: They are just not robust. tdb has a
runtime check for this. Are you interested?

Sure, post a link to more info.

I found this since you mentioned it.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=628608

But it only affects a mutex that was locked in a process that subsequently forks a child. The LMDB docs already say explicitly that a process must not fork with an open LMDB environment so this particular issue doesn't affect us.

--
  -- Howard Chu
  CTO, Symas Corp.           http://www.symas.com
  Director, Highland Sun     http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
  Chief Architect, OpenLDAP  http://www.openldap.org/project/