Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers-win32 <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch
Date: 2003-12-16 20:20:38
Message-ID: 3FDF6916.8020901@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers-win32

Steve Tibbett wrote:

>>Isn't WaitForSingleObject() in effect a polling call?
>>
>>
>
>It puts your thread to sleep, until it gets woken up by the handle
>you're waiting on being set to a signalled state.
>
>
>

Right. Just like select() puts your thread to sleep until one of its
files is ready (or it times out).

Do we have a terminology problem here?

The point is that, unlike classic Unix signal programming, you need
*something* that explicitly checks for the event. It could be a separate
thread in a tight loop, which is what the CONNX code appears to do, or
it could conceivably be something else in the main thread with a very
short timeout.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Merlin Moncure 2003-12-16 20:20:49 Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch
Previous Message Steve Tibbett 2003-12-16 20:06:28 Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch