Re: Can we simplify win32 threading code
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Can we simplify win32 threading code |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4295DBF2.7030006@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Can we simplify win32 threading code ("Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander wrote: >>(*) the process who kill the signal: >> - put the signal in a *shared memory variable >>pg_signal_queue* and >>SetEvent(*shared_memory_event_variable*), then it is done; >> >>(*) the process who should receive the signal: >> - the main thread of this process could be awakened by the >>event from waiting status(like semop()) or >>CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() actively; -- there is no other threads >>of this process; >> >>Any show-stop reasons of not doing this? >> >> > >Yeah, that should work. With one shared memory segment and one event for >each process, of course. The event can be the same one as is used now, >only it has to be named so it can be accessed externally. > > > > I assume that this will not break the use of pg_ctl to deliver pseudo-signals. That would be a show-stopper. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: