Tom Lane wrote: > Manfred Spraul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> return false; /* No threading, so we can't be in send() */ > > > Why not? Signal delivery can interrupt send() even with single-threaded > > users. > > It looks like Bruce left the old logic in place for unthreaded > implementations: we just replace the signal handler during every send(). > So there's no need for PQinSend() to do anything useful.
I have updated the CVS comments to more clearly explain this. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
