On Jul 1, 5:21 am, Andrew Piskorski <a...@piskorski.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 06:19:06PM -0700, Sep Ng wrote: > > How can I tell which ones are thread safe? This sounds like something > > I will need to look into before I start writing code. > > *All* AOLserver modules must be thread safe. If they have any parts > that are not, then that's clearly a bug which their developer > overlooked, and needs to be fixed. > > Keep in mind however, that it's entirely possible for a module to call > some external C library which happens to be completely thread-safe on > one operating system, but horribly unsafe another. All part of the > "fun" of cross-platform programming... > This likely means that whatever issues I'm hitting will still happen even with a rewrite. Alright, I will try and take a closer look at all of this.
> If you manage to find a list somewhere of what MS Windows library > calls are or are not thread-safe, then you could use various tools to > find ALL the calls in your AOLserver binaries, and compare the two > lists to see if AOLserver seems to be calling anything unsafe. > > Unfortunately very few operating systems provide any such clear, > consolidated documentation of what function calls are thread-safe > vs. not. You're lucky if the docs on each individual function call > even tell you, and of course as Gustaf mentioned, occasionally those > docs are wrong. > > My general impression though, is that historically MS Windows has > tended to have a lot FEWER non-thread-safe library calls in use than > Unix. This is probably because Win32 was first written in an era when > threads were very popular, while most versions of Unix have roots > stretching back well before then. > > (Supposedly that's also why the multi-process support in Win32 has > always been said to be lousy, but the success of multi-process Google > Chrome on Win32 suggest that those problems have either been fixed, or > can be effectively worked around.) > > > > I prefer libthread, since all such threads run in an event loop. > > I don't think I've ever heard of this on Aolserver... I always thought > > Aolserver's threads would eventually end up using the tcl+libthread > > but it seems that there's a real difference in this. > > The Tcl Threads Extension's libthread was written AFTER AOLserver; in > fact AOLserver is what inspired Zoran to write libthread in the first > place. Generally speaking, libthread is backwards compatible with > AOLserver, but also includes some newer stuff that AOLserver does not. > > libthread is designed so that you can easily use it from inside > AOLserver, including as a drop-in replacement for AOLserver's older > nsv_* code. It should be technically feasible to change AOLserver to > use libthread directly, but no one has done the work. > > (And anyway, none of that has much of anything to do with your > debugging problem.) > > > So typically the config file has no connection whatsoever to the > > threads of aolserver and that it only pertains to the connection > > threads, or am I confusing this even further? > > Your "the threads of aolserver" terminology above is certainly > confused. A "connection thread" is one of the various flavors of > threads used in AOLserver. > Right. Thanks for that clarification. You guys have been tremendously helpful in giving me such immensely informative posts so this is all well appreciated. > -- > Andrew Piskorski <a...@piskorski.com>http://www.piskorski.com/ > > -- > AOLserver -http://www.aolserver.com/ > > To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to > <lists...@listserv.aol.com> with the > body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can leave the Subject: > field of your email blank. -- AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/ To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to <lists...@listserv.aol.com> with the body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can leave the Subject: field of your email blank.
