Tom, > A feature that is exercised via setsockopt is probably fairly safe, > since you can check for failure of the setsockopt call and then do > it the old way. MSG_NOSIGNAL is a recv() flag, no?
It's a flag to send(). > The question is whether you could expect that the recv() would fail if > it had any unrecognized flags. Not sure if I trust that. SO_NOSIGPIPE > seems safer. Yep, a once-off test would be better. However, I don't seem to have a NOSIGPIPE sockopt here :( Cheers, Jeremy -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
