Geometry Boost List: Re: [geometry] Crash in rtree after growing shared memory, VS2012 x64, Boost 1.55

Subject: Re: [geometry] Crash in rtree after growing shared memory, VS2012 x64, Boost 1.55
From: Adam Wulkiewicz (adam.wulkiewicz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-11-26 06:33:49

Hi Tim,

Tim Finer wrote:
> On 11/25/14, 4:25 PM, Adam Wulkiewicz wrote:
>> If you're asking about an info about the change of an internal 
>> structure it isn't mentioned anywhere. There is only an info about 
>> fixing a bug with Interprocess.
>>
>> I dissagree that this should be mentioned in the docs, it's an 
>> internal change. Furthermore AFAIU Interprocess doesn't guarantee 
>> that the representation of data will be the same in various versions 
>> of Boost nor it wasn't designed to support versioning so we shouldn't 
>> rely on this. Btw, Serialization supports versioning.
> Sure, I understand that there are no guarantees between versions. I 
> might've misunderstood your warning though.  I thought you were 
> advising not to use 1.55 IPC and bg rtree in general (without 
> updating) because of an internal polymorphic node?  If so, then I 
> don't see why the documentation with the sample shouldn't be edited to 
> say something like "don't use this until 1.56" or something. 

I was advising not to use 1.54 or 1.55 with Interprocess. It's mentioned 
in the release notes for 1.56 
(http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_57_0/libs/geometry/doc/html/geometry/release_notes.html#geometry.release_notes.boost_1_56), 
in Bugfixes section: "rtree crashed in some cases when used with 
Interprocess allocator".

Documentation is built and redistributed with Boost, a copy is placed on 
a webpage. It's not possible to add an info in docs of already released 
versions. To do it we probably would be forced to release e.g. version 
1.xx.1 and nobody would agree to do that for adding a message in the 
docs, and after a release period. Not to mention that there are already 
2 newer versions of Boost released. So this info could be added in 1.58 
but wouldn't be visible in the documentation for older versions. It 
probably isn't a good solution since users of 1.58 would just ignore it, 
and users of 1.55 wouldn't see it.

Regards,
Adam