Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>
Cc: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums
Date: 2018-10-02 22:50:36
Message-ID: CAEepm=3hxjRWosK=xneuUL6nh1qP9ugqQhqrTCAyoccmvhvbnw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:07 AM Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de> wrote:
> I've attached v4 of the patch.

Hi Michael,

Windows doesn't like sigaction:

https://ci.appveyor.com/project/postgresql-cfbot/postgresql/build/1.0.15189

I'm not sure if we classify this as a "frontend" program. Should it
be using pqsignal() from src/port/pqsignal.c? Or perhaps just
sigaction as you have it (pqsignal.c says that we require sigaction on
all Unices), but #ifndef WIN32 around that stuff, since SIGUSR1 is
never going to work anyway.

--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2018-10-02 23:01:22 Re: [HACKERS] proposal: schema variables
Previous Message Jacob Champion 2018-10-02 22:24:00 Re: Obtaining a more consistent view definition when a UNION subquery contains undecorated constants