On 2016-03-19 15:43:27 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > > > On March 18, 2016 11:52:08 PM PDT, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> >Won't the new code needs to ensure that ResetEvent(latchevent) > > >should > > >> >get > > >> >called in case WaitForMultipleObjects() comes out when both > > >> >pgwin32_signal_event and latchevent are signalled at the same time?
> > >> WaitForMultiple only reports the readiness of on event at a time, no? > > >> > > > > > >I don't think so, please read link [1] with a focus on below paragraph > > >which states how it reports the readiness or signaled state when > > >multiple > > >objects become signaled. > > > > > >"When *bWaitAll* is *FALSE*, this function checks the handles in the > > >array > > >in order starting with index 0, until one of the objects is signaled. > > >If > > >multiple objects become signaled, the function returns the index of the > > >first handle in the array whose object was signaled." I think this is just incredibly bad documentation. See https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20150409-00/?p=44273 (Raymond Chen can be considered an authority here imo). Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
