On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> writes: >> On mån, 2012-05-21 at 13:14 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >>> ... wait, scratch that. AFAICS, that commit was totally useless, >>> because BlockSig should always already contain SIGQUIT. > >> No, because PostgresMain() deletes it from BlockSig. > > Ah. So potentially we have an issue in all the background processes > that have copied-and-pasted that sigdelset call, which seems to be most > of them. > > I'm inclined to think this does need to be fixed. Even if it > accidentally works now, it seems fragile as can be; and certainly > it's underdocumented.
+1 And I found that PG_SETMASK(&UnBlockSig) in WalSenderMain() is useless because it's always called in PostgresMain() before entering WalSenderMain(). Regards, -- Fujii Masao -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
