Re: SIGPIPE handling

Manfred Spraul <manfred(at)colorfullife(dot)com> writes:
> But how should libpq notice that the caller handles sigpipe signals?
> a) autodetection - if the sigpipe handler is not the default, then the
> caller knows what he's doing.
> b) a new PGsetsignalhandler() function.
> c) an additional flag passed to PGconnectdb.

> Tom preferred a). One problem is that the autodetection is not perfect:
> an app could block the signal with sigprocmask, or it could install a
> handler that doesn't expect sigpipe signals from within libpq.
> I would prefer b), because it guarantees that the patch has no effect on
> existing apps.

I have no particular objection to (b) either, but IIRC there was some
dispute about whether it sets a global or per-connection flag. ISTM
that "I have a correct signal handler" is a global assertion (within one
process) and so a global flag is appropriate. Someone else (Bruce?)
didn't like that though.

regards, tom lane