| From: | "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Claudio Natoli" <claudio(dot)natoli(at)memetrics(dot)com>, "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers-win32" <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Win32 signal code - first try |
| Date: | 2004-01-09 13:33:13 |
| Message-ID: | 303E00EBDD07B943924382E153890E5434AA43@cuthbert.rcsinc.local |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers-win32 |
> > > > > SleepEx(0,TRUE), or something of the like.
I personally thing WaitForSingleObjectEx() with a dummy handle is the
only option, unless we are actually waiting for multiple objects (it is
much faster than WFMOEx.
> looks as though blocked signals will be forever lost. If I'm right in
my
> recollection, we'll need some way to requeue the APC (which might be
> non-trivial).
Perhaps it would be easier to hold up the QueueAPC with a manual-switch
event object until the signal handler is cleared to run.
Merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Claudio Natoli | 2004-01-09 15:21:50 | Re: Win32 signal code - first try |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2004-01-09 13:29:11 | Re: Win32 signal code - first try |