Re: Proposal to add a QNX 6.5 port to PostgreSQL

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Baker, Keith [OCDUS Non-J&J]" <KBaker9(at)its(dot)jnj(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal to add a QNX 6.5 port to PostgreSQL
Date: 2014-08-22 05:36:37
Message-ID: 20140822053637.GA571661@tornado.leadboat.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 01:33:38AM +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-07-25 18:29:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > * QNX lacks sigaction SA_RESTART: I modified "src/include/port.h" to define macros to retry system calls upon EINTR (open,read,write,...) when compiled on QNX
> >
> > That's pretty scary too. For one thing, such macros would affect every
> > call site whether it's running with SA_RESTART or not. Do you really
> > need it? It looks to me like we just turn off HAVE_POSIX_SIGNALS if
> > you don't have SA_RESTART. Maybe that code has bit-rotted by now, but
> > it did work at one time.
>
> I have pretty much no trust that we're maintaining
> !HAVE_POSIX_SIGNAL. And none that we have that capability of doing so. I
> seriously doubt there's any !HAVE_POSIX_SIGNAL animals and
> 873ab97219caabeb2f7b390268a4fe01e2b7518c makes it pretty darn unlikely
> that we have much chance of finding such mistakes during development.

I bet it's fine for its intended target, namely BSD-style signal() in which
SA_RESTART-like behavior is implicit. See the src/port/pqsignal.c header
comment. PostgreSQL has no support for V7-style/QNX-style signal().

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marko Tiikkaja 2014-08-22 07:02:01 Re: pgcrypto: PGP signatures
Previous Message Ashutosh Bapat 2014-08-22 05:35:15 Re: Compute attr_needed for child relations (was Re: inherit support for foreign tables)