Re: Signals on Win32 (yet again) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers-win32

From Merlin Moncure
Subject Re: Signals on Win32 (yet again)
Date
Msg-id 303E00EBDD07B943924382E153890E5434AA37@cuthbert.rcsinc.local
Whole thread Raw
In response to Signals on Win32 (yet again)  ("Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net>)
List pgsql-hackers-win32
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Maybe. I'm not quite convinced of that yet - we can SleepEx with a
very
> small timeout, no? There must be a few critical places the call could
be
> made, which would in effect just delay delivery of the signal for a
very
> short time to some convenient sequence point.

Actually, you don't need any timeout at all.
WaitForSingleObject(INFINITE) keeps on running if the event object is
kept signaled, so performance is not an issue.  We can use 'manual'
events to keep the Event object open all the time unless explicitly
turned off via a signal thread.

Implementation difficulties aside, what is more attractive from an
aesthetic standpoint?  Releasing (and supporting) a 100 line binary
kernel driver for win32 or adding polling to the source in all the key
loops?

Merlin





pgsql-hackers-win32 by date:

Previous
From: "Steve Tibbett"
Date:
Subject: Re: Signals on Win32 (yet again)
Next
From: "Joseph S. Barrera III"
Date:
Subject: Re: Signals on Win32 (yet again)