Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > On 2015-12-30 12:30:43 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> Nor OS X. Ugh. My first thought was that ac1d7945f broke this, but >> that's only in HEAD not 9.5, so some earlier change must be responsible.
> The backtrace in > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/CADT4RqBo79_0Vx%3D-%2By%3DnFv3zdnm_-CgGzbtSv9LhxrFEoYMVFg%40mail.gmail.com > seems to indicate that it's really WaitLatchOrSocket() not noticing the > socket is closed. Right, and what I was wondering was whether adding the additional wait-for condition had exposed some pre-existing flaw in the Windows latch code. But that's not it, so we're left with the conclusion that we broke something that used to work. Are we sure this is a 9.5-only bug? Shay, can you try 9.4 branch tip and see if it misbehaves? Can anyone else reproduce the problem? 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
