Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 08/09/2011 12:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> 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.
> So what's your suggestion? I know what you said you'd like, but it
> doesn't appear at all practical to me.
[ shrug... ] Installing a perl module that mucks with the signal
handlers is in the "don't do that" category. A kluge such as you
suggest will not get it out of that category; all it will do is add
useless overhead for people who are following the rules.
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
