Re: SIGPIPE handling

From: Kurt Roeckx <Q(at)ping(dot)be>
To: Manfred Spraul <manfred(at)colorfullife(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SIGPIPE handling
Date: 2003-11-16 17:28:06
Message-ID: 20031116172806.GA29847@ping.be
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 12:56:10PM +0100, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Hi,
>
> attached is an update of my automatic sigaction patch: I've moved the
> actual sigaction calls into pqsignal.c and added a helper function
> (pgsignalinquire(signo)). I couldn't remove the include <signal.h> from
> fe-connect.c: it's required for the SIGPIPE definition.
> Additionally I've added a -a flag for pgbench that sets the signal
> handler before calling PQconnectdb.

Is there a reason we don't make use of the MSG_NOSIGNAL flag to
send()? Or is the problem in case of SSL?

Kurt

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-11-16 17:29:52 Re: [PATCHES] SRA Win32 sync() code
Previous Message Steven Singer 2003-11-16 17:28:01 contrib/dbmirror conditional replication