On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 09:34:42AM +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2014-08-22 01:36:37 -0400, Noah Misch wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 01:33:38AM +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > > > On 2014-07-25 18:29:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > > > > * QNX lacks sigaction SA_RESTART: I modified > > > > > "src/include/port.h" to define macros to retry system calls upon > > > > > EINTR (open,read,write,...) when compiled on QNX > > > > > > > > That's pretty scary too. For one thing, such macros would affect every > > > > call site whether it's running with SA_RESTART or not. Do you really > > > > need it? It looks to me like we just turn off HAVE_POSIX_SIGNALS if > > > > you don't have SA_RESTART. Maybe that code has bit-rotted by now, but > > > > it did work at one time. > > > > > > I have pretty much no trust that we're maintaining > > > !HAVE_POSIX_SIGNAL. And none that we have that capability of doing so. I > > > seriously doubt there's any !HAVE_POSIX_SIGNAL animals and > > > 873ab97219caabeb2f7b390268a4fe01e2b7518c makes it pretty darn unlikely > > > that we have much chance of finding such mistakes during development. > > > > I bet it's fine for its intended target, namely BSD-style signal() in which > > SA_RESTART-like behavior is implicit. See the src/port/pqsignal.c header > > comment. PostgreSQL has no support for V7-style/QNX-style signal(). > > That might be true - although I'm not sure it actually still works - but > my point is that I can't see Tom's suggestion on relying on > !HAVE_POSIX_SIGNALS for QNX work out.
True. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
