Re: longjmp in psql considered harmful - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: longjmp in psql considered harmful
Date
Msg-id 24166.1150052258@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: longjmp in psql considered harmful  (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>)
Responses Re: longjmp in psql considered harmful  (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> writes:
> As it states in the comment, you can't remove the longjump because
> it's the only way to break out of the read() call when using BSD signal
> semantics (unless you're proposing non-blocking read+select()). So the
> patch sets up the sigjump just before the read() and allows the routine
> to return. If you're not waiting for read(), no sigjump is done.

I think you're missing my point, which is: do we need control-C to
force a break out of that fgets at all?
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: TODO: Add pg_get_acldef(), pg_get_typedefault(), pg_get_attrdef(),
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pl/tcl regression failed