Subject | Re: [ib-support] Firebird and threads |
---|---|
Author | Ann W. Harrison |
Post date | 2001-11-05T14:56:04Z |
At 03:58 PM 11/4/2001 -0700, Brad Pepers wrote:
processes created.
it's firebird specific, though if it were, it would be easier to find.
Regards,
Ann
www.ibphoenix.com
> > ... each client being a separate process. The other... a serverOne what is to make three connections and count the number of
> > which support several clients.
>
>How do I verify this?
processes created.
>Ok so even local connections with threads should work on Linux? Good to knowThey should work in Classic. I don't know about superserver.
>but not a worry right now since I always treat even local connections as
>remote.
>...current_context returned by THD_get_specific() inRight, of course.
>THD_restore_specific is null so the next line that uses the current context
>to get the thdd_prior_context is referencing a null.
>So the question is just how THD_get_specific can return NULL. Is it a set ofI assume it's a race condition or we'd see it all the time. I doubt that
>mismatched code somewhere else? The THD_put_specific acts like a push and
>the THD_restore_specific like a pop so if these are not matched somewhere in
>the code, you could get too many pops. Or is it a race condition that just
>takes tons of concurrent client requests to show up?
it's firebird specific, though if it were, it would be easier to find.
>I found another small thing when looking at the code. The THD_cleanup codeRight. Sloppy.
>does a --initialized even though everywhere else initialized is treated as
>just a thrue/false value and *not* a count of uses. The code in THD_cleanup
>should just be setting initialized to FALSE rather than pretending its a
>reference count or something.
Regards,
Ann
www.ibphoenix.com