Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 08/08/2011 05:03 AM, Tim Bunce wrote:
>> After giving it some more thought it seems reasonable to simply force the
>> SIGALRM handler back to postgres when a plperlu function returns:
>> pqsignal(SIGALRM, handle_sig_alarm);
> Maybe we need to do this in some more centralized spot. It seems
> unlikely that this problem is unique to plperlu, or even just confined
> to PLs.
No. As I pointed out upthread, the instant somebody changes the SIGALRM
handler to a non-Postgres-aware one, you are already at risk of failure.
Setting it back later is just locking the barn door after the horses
left. Institutionalizing such a non-fix globally is even worse.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
