On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 02:57:59PM +0400, Ilja Golshtein wrote: > Hello! > > I've came across recent change of > postmaster/pgstat.c with comment > regarding send/EINTR issue. > > Does it make sense to amend, > for example, secure_write() in > be_secure.c (part of libpq) > in the same way? > Am I right thinking it may > fail during reloading configuration? > Is it the only dangerous case? The point is that EINTR is not supposed to happen, at all, in the backend. It should only happen with non-blocking sockets (not used in backend) or interruption by a signal (disabled in the backend). My understanding of the EINTR change is that it's a windows issue, which doesn't totally follow the above rules. BTW, be_secure is used in the backend, fe-secure is used in libpq and does support non-blocking and EINTR. If it possible for the system to return EINTR in secure_read/secure_write, then we also need to worry about it during disk access and many other places. Hope this helps, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@xxxxxxxxx> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
