Re: PQinSend question - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: PQinSend question
Date
Msg-id 200402101521.i1AFLg520255@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PQinSend question  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com> writes:
> >> return false;   /* No threading, so we can't be in send() */
> 
> > Why not? Signal delivery can interrupt send() even with single-threaded 
> > users.
> 
> It looks like Bruce left the old logic in place for unthreaded
> implementations: we just replace the signal handler during every send().
> So there's no need for PQinSend() to do anything useful.

I have updated the CVS comments to more clearly explain this.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Current-stream read for psql's \copy
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: PQinSend question