Re: Bug in signal handler - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Bug in signal handler
Date
Msg-id 6390.1147356660@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Bug in signal handler  (Douglas McNaught <doug@mcnaught.org>)
Responses Re: Bug in signal handler
List pgsql-hackers
Douglas McNaught <doug@mcnaught.org> writes:
> Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> writes:
>> Running unsafe functions within a signal handler is not unsafe per-se.
>> It's only unsafe if the main program could also be running unsafe
>> functions.

> I don't disagree with your reasoning, but does POSIX actually say
> this?

The fact remains that the postmaster has *always* been coded like that,
and we have *never* seen any problems.  Barring proof that there is a
problem, I'm uninterested in rewriting it just because someone doesn't
like it.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Martijn van Oosterhout
Date:
Subject: Re: Bug in signal handler
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Upcoming releases