Tom Lane wrote:
> I don't like the idea of redesigning that
> code just because someone misunderstands it.
Fair enough, on both counts. However, the original question which was asked
out of ignorance (that I'll freely admit) doesn't seem to have been directly
addressed:
Claudio Natoli wrote:
> T
> If that is indeed the case, I withdraw all my comments and misdirected
> ideas, and say we go for a win32 specific workaround :-)
We just need to be very careful on what this work-around is though...
For instance, whilst the idea of an "APCcalled" flag will work just fine,
mechanically, I'm ex
