Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> writes: > So why would I add another wrapper like PG_SETMASK and leave it > unimplemented for now on Windows, when I could just use sigprocmask() > directly and leave it unimplemented for now on Windows?
Fair enough, I guess. No objection to this patch.
(Someday we oughta go ahead and make our Windows signal API look more
like POSIX, as I suggested back in 2015. I'm still not taking
point on that, though.)
regards, tom lane
