On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 12:00:09PM +0200, Florian Pflug wrote: > On Jun7, 2012, at 10:20 , Sandro Santilli wrote:
> > In that case I can understand Tom's advice about providing a callback, > > and then I would only need to perform the "events flushing" part of > > from within the callback, and only for windows. > > Why would you need a signal handler in the library at all, then? Just > test the same flags that CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS does in the callback, and > call your interrupt request method if they indicate "abort". (Or, slightly > cleaner maybe, allow the callback to abort processing by returning false) I'm just afraid that invoking a callback (from a library to user code) could be significantly slower than simply lookup a variable, especially if the interruption checking is performed very frequently. But maybe I'm being overparanoid. --strk; ,------o-. | __/ | Delivering high quality PostGIS 2.0 ! | / 2.0 | http://strk.keybit.net - http://vizzuality.com `-o------' -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
