On 12/11/16 20:19, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2016-11-10 23:31:27 +0100, Petr Jelinek wrote: >> On 04/11/16 13:15, Andres Freund wrote: >>> >>> /* Prototypes for private functions */ >>> -static bool libpq_select(int timeout_ms); >>> +static bool libpq_select(PGconn *streamConn, >>> + int timeout_ms); >>> >>> If we're starting to use this more widely, we really should just a latch >>> instead of the plain select(). In fact, I think it's more or less a bug >>> that we don't (select is only interruptible by signals on a subset of >>> our platforms). That shouldn't bother this patch, but... >>> >>> >> >> Agree that this is problem, especially for the subscription creation >> later. We should be doing WaitLatchOrSocket, but the question is which >> latch. We can't use MyProc one as that's not the latch that WalReceiver >> uses so I guess we would have to send latch as parameter to any caller >> of this which is not very pretty from api perspective but I don't have >> better idea here. > > I think we should simply make walsender use the standard proc > latch. Afaics that should be fairly trivial?
Walreceiver you mean. Yeah that should be simple, looking at the code I am not quite sure why it uses separate latch in the first place. -- Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers