[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#326648: libsqlite3-0: database handles can't be shared among threads any more

On Sun, Sep 04, 2005 at 10:07:56PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Florian Weimer:
> > * Adeodato Simó:
> >
> >>   Also, I have no idea what's the case for Debian: "On some versions of
> >>   Linux, a thread is not able to override locks created by a different
> >>   thread in the same process." Does this depend on the kernel, on libc,
> >>   or on something else?
> >
> > This is probably the same problem as the svnserve problem described
> > here:
> >
> >   <http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2005-04/0355.shtml>
> >
> > IIRC, NPTL is fine, but LinuxThreads aren't.
> I intended to write the opposite: file locks are a per-process
> resource in NPTL, so NPTL probably has the problems, and LinuxThreads
> doesn't.

A question: why using file locking instead of thread mutexes (which is the proper
answer to syncronization issues in a thread-safe architecture)? 
"It's more easy" is not a decent answer, of course.

Francesco P. Lovergine

Reply to: