Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: bug in windows xp

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, Wang Haiyong <wanghaiyong(at)neusoft(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: bug in windows xp
Date: 2006-04-19 14:45:48
Message-ID: 26003.1145457948@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugspgsql-patches
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> Well, depends how you look at it. The original bug report was about a
> backend crash, which is what happens if you don't catch the SIGFPE. Can
> we guarentee that we know every situation that might generate a SIGFPE?

The point here is that under Windows int4div seems to be generating
something other than a SIGFPE --- if it were actually generating that
particular signal then the existing SIGFPE catcher would catch it.

It's barely possible that int4div *is* generating a SIGFPE and there's
some other breakage preventing FloatExceptionHandler from catching it,
but that's a question that deserves a one-shot test, not permanent
memorialization in a regression test.  Besides, if that's the situation
then testing that the handler catches kill(SIGFPE) proves exactly zero
about what the int4div problem is.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Peter BrantDate: 2006-04-19 15:50:52
Subject: Re: Permission denied on fsync / Win32 (was right
Previous:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2006-04-19 14:38:17
Subject: Re: bug in windows xp

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2006-04-19 14:48:07
Subject: Re: Two coverity non-bugs
Previous:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2006-04-19 14:38:17
Subject: Re: bug in windows xp

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group