Hi, On 2017-04-20 17:27:42 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > > On 2017-04-19 20:06:05 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> We should check the buildfarm to see if the select() implementation is > >> being tested at all. > > > I verified it's currently not (unless I made a mistake): > > I did my own checking, and concur that only the MinGW buildfarm members > are reporting lacking poll(2) or poll.h. Since they also report lacking > sys/select.h, they must be falling through to the WAIT_USE_WIN32 > implementation. So the WAIT_USE_SELECT implementation is going untested > in the buildfarm, and has been since before the WaitEventSet API existed > (I checked buildfarm records back to the start of 2016).
Similarly with the SELECT based unix_latch.c code before... > In short: yeah, let's nuke the WAIT_USE_SELECT implementation. > It's dead code and it's unlikely to get resurrected. Ok, cool. v10 or wait till v11? I see very little reason to wait personally. > BTW, noting that SUSv2 specifies <poll.h> not <sys/poll.h>, I wonder > whether we couldn't drop configure's test for the latter along with > the > > #ifdef HAVE_SYS_POLL_H > #include <sys/poll.h> > #endif > > stanzas we have in a couple of places. But that's a separate issue. Seems like a good idea, a quick select confirms there's no !win buildfarm animals without poll.h. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
