| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!) |
| Date: | 2010-09-06 18:46:30 |
| Message-ID: | 20707.1283798790@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> writes:
> Is pselect() really as unportable as stated in the patch? What platforms
> have problems with pselect()?
Well, it's not defined in the Single Unix Spec, which is our customary
reference for portability. Also, it's alleged that some platforms have
it but in a form that's not actually any safer than select(). For
example, I read in the Darwin man page for it
IMPLEMENTATION NOTES
The pselect() function is implemented in the C library as a wrapper
around select().
and that man page appears to be borrowed verbatim from FreeBSD.
> Using the self-pipe trick, don't we risk running into the open file
> handles limitation? Or is it just two handles per process?
It's just two handles per process.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2010-09-06 19:07:33 | Re: 9.1alpha1 bundled -- please verify |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-09-06 18:41:27 | Re: 9.1alpha1 bundled -- please verify |