On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 1:28 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> Linux: "Blocked signals are never ignored, since the signal handler
> may change by the time it is unblocked."
I should add, that's what the source says. The man page for
sigpending(2) makes the opposite claim in its NOTES section on my
Debia
On Sat, Apr 17, 2021 at 8:49 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> (I would've thought that a SIG_IGN'd signal would be dropped
> immediately even if blocked; that's the behavior that dummy_handler
> is designed to prevent, and I'm pretty sure that that code is there
> because we saw it actually behaving that way
Thomas Munro writes:
> On Sat, Apr 17, 2021 at 12:46 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> Is it really necessary to mess with UnBlockSig?
> It's necessary to keep it blocked, because, to quote signalfd(2):
>Normally, the set of signals to be received via the file descriptor
>should be bloc
On Sat, Apr 17, 2021 at 12:46 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> It might be good to extend the comment in postmaster.c though, perhaps
> along the lines of "Ignore SIGURG for now. Child processes may change
> this (see InitializeLatchSupport), but they will not receive any such
> signals until they wait on a
Thomas Munro writes:
> Here's a patch to change that. But... on second thoughts, and after
> coming up with a commit message to explain the change, I'm not 100%
> convinced it's worth committing. You can't get SIGURG without
> explicitly asking for it (by setting maybe_sleeping), which makes it
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 10:50 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 2:26 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > It's possible that that argument doesn't apply to the way SIGURG is used
> > in this patch, but I don't see a good reason to ignore the convention of
> > setting up the handler this way.
>
>
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 2:26 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> It's possible that that argument doesn't apply to the way SIGURG is used
> in this patch, but I don't see a good reason to ignore the convention of
> setting up the handler this way.
Yeah, will fix. I don't think there is a bug here given the way
Thomas Munro writes:
> Use SIGURG rather than SIGUSR1 for latches.
I notice that postmaster.c still does
#ifdef SIGURG
pqsignal_pm(SIGURG, SIG_IGN); /* ignored */
#endif
It appears to me that this should now read
pqsignal_pm(SIGURG, dummy_handler);/* unused, reserve for ch
