defect

[Joe Little]

two snippets from Luke when speaking about 2.1 (and whether it was finally thread safe:

lukeh:
On what is thread safe? The client library? The server? I thought it was
always pretty much thread safe. I think they've shaken down some issues
with the transactional (bdb) backend.

When I mentioned complaints here about thread safety, his response:

I haven't seen those complaints. The OpenLDAP client library is guaranteed
to be thread safe as long as you (a) link against libldap_r and (b) do
not permit concurrent access to a single LDAP session (ie. use one per
thread or a mutex around it).

So, libldap_r is one requirement... but the other seems to be already set by our use of internal thread locking to that single session.

On Friday, June 28, 2002, at 09:43 AM, Michael Ströder wrote:

> Joe Little wrote:
>> We beat this one up a bit before... But I asked Luke Howard (who is generally in the know on this stuff) again about OpenLDAP thread-safety, and he said that it is thread safe.
>
> Since when? Which version? Which lib? libldap_r is supposed to be reentrant but that's not what python-ldap is built against. Furthermore it was not possible to get a positive statement from Kurt Zeilenga last time I asked.
>
> Ciao, Michael.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 1321 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ldap/attachments/20020628/31f026cb/attachment.bin>