Re: WAL fsync scheduling - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: WAL fsync scheduling
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.21.0011181941440.1331-100000@peter.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WAL fsync scheduling  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: WAL fsync scheduling
Re: WAL fsync scheduling
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane writes:

> OK, we can probably assume that at least one of sigsuspend or sigpause
> is available everywhere.

#ifdef HAVE_POSIX_SIGNALS should tell you.

> Now all you need is a free signal number. Unfortunately we're already
> using both SIGUSR1 and SIGUSR2.

Maybe you could dump the old meaning SIGQUIT (externally invoked error),
move quickdie() to SIGQUIT, and you got SIGUSR1 free.

(That would even make sense in two ways:  1) SIGQUIT would actually cause
the guy to quit; 2) there is a correspondence between postmaster and
postgres signals.)

-- 
Peter Eisentraut      peter_e@gmx.net       http://yi.org/peter-e/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL fsync scheduling
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL fsync scheduling