Re: Singnals code (not just win32 specific)

From: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
To: Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers-win32 <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Singnals code (not just win32 specific)
Date: 2004-01-22 13:34:35
Message-ID: 400FD16B.7050502@Yahoo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Hello!
>
> The backend signals code today uses pqsignal() instead of signal() at
> all places. But it uses kill() and sigsetmask() (through the macro
> PG_SETMASK) directly.
>
> I propose to change this to pqkill() and pqsigsetmask(). In pqsignal.h,
> these would be #define:d back to kill() and setsigmask() for the normal
> method, but would be functions on win32.

Sounds logical and more consistent than it is now.

While talking about it, I think our usage of signals is way overloaded
anyway. Any ideas how to replace it all with just one signal and a
regular message queue?

Jan

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jan Wieck 2004-01-22 14:20:58 Re: cache control?
Previous Message Thomas Hallgren 2004-01-22 12:55:53 Dynamic modules and standard naming practice

Browse pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Merlin Moncure 2004-01-22 14:59:51 What's left?
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2004-01-22 09:54:10 Singnals code (not just win32 specific)