Re: Win32 signal code - first try

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers-win32 <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Win32 signal code - first try
Date: 2004-01-08 22:53:20
Message-ID: 3FFDDF60.8060404@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers-win32

Merlin Moncure wrote:

>
>Also, all signals will be run FIFO. Is this acceptable? (maybe a unix
>expert could chime in here).
>
>
>

Stevens' APUE (if you do any Unix programming and you don't have this
book, run don't walk and get it ;-) ) says: "POSIX.1 does not specify
the order in which signals are delivered to a process. The Rationale for
POSIX.1 does suggest, however, that signals related to the current state
of the process, such as SIGSEGV, be delivered before other signals."

AFAIK we are not using any of the signals he is referring to in the
second sentence, so FIFO should be fine.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2004-01-08 23:38:00 Re: Win32 signal code - first try
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2004-01-08 22:17:27 Re: Win32 signal code - first try