FreeTDS Development Group

[liam AT inodes.org]

On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 05:49:44PM +0200, Frediano Ziglio wrote:

> I think so, it can be a performance bottleneck but how care for
> performance while logging debugging information??

Agreed.
 
> I would use mutex for connection list/recftos members.

Okay, so the strategy moving is to protect the current global structure
with mutexes rather than moving TDSCONTEXT into a per DBPROCESS 
structure. Agreed?

This is incremental change is least likely to introduce new problems
when compared with something more significant as making TDSCONTEXT
per-connection.
 
> I agree, but easy mutex coding can be a very performance bottleneck...

That's true, but at the moment, any serious use of dblib without
mutual exclusion results in SIGSEGV and/or undesirable consequences.

I am sure most users will take poor performance over non-deterministic
behaviour and corrupted data.

The implementation is such that it will not affect the performance of 
non-thread based applications.
 
> By definition of its implementation... what does it mean??

It means if libtds itself is not thread-safe.

Cheers.