Re: SIGTERM does not stop backend postgres processes immediately

[Tim Baker]

From: "Christopher Faylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >It is hard to see how Cygwin could emulate this in the general case if
> >closing the socket is the only way to unblock recv(win32).  But what's
> >the harm in allowing signals to be handled while in recv(cygwin) even
> >if recv(win32) remains blocked?
> 
> Wow.  There is really a communication breakdown here.  I keep telling
> you that it is not possible to do what you want and you keep acting like
> I'm making policy decisions which, if only I would relent, would solve
> your problems.


He's not "receiving" your meaning.

Me bad.
-- Tim Baker


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple