Bruce Momjian writes:
> Lee Kindness wrote:
> > No, it's not. Using the _r functions on such systems is BETTER because
> > the API is clean and the function can be implmented in a reentrant and
> > thread-safe fashion wuithout the need for thread local storage or
> > mutex locking.
> I don't care about overhead at this point. These functions are rarely
> called.
Nor do I, but there is no requirement or point in using the
traditional interface over the _r one then the traditional one is
known to be thread-safe. It only adds additional complexity.
L.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
