I wrote:
> Petr Jelinek <petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> Thanks, now that I look at it again I think we might need to do cycle
>> with the occurred_events and returned_events and not return on first
>> find since theoretically there can be multiple sockets if this gets
>> called directly and not via WaitLatchOrSocket(). I don't have mental
>> power to finish it up right now though, sorry for that.
> I think WaitEventSet is only required to identify at least one reason
> for ending the wait; it is not required to identify all of them.
Also, I see the header comment for the Windows version of
WaitEventSetWaitBlock says it really only ever reports one event anyway.
So there seems no need to work harder than this. Pushed with cosmetic
adjustments.
regards, tom lane
