On 2017-04-24 04:27:58 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 24/04/17 01:43, Andres Freund wrote: > > > >> BTW while looking at the code, I don't understand why we call > >> latch_sigusr1_handler after calling SetLatch(MyLatch), shouldn't just > >> the SetLatch be enough (they both end up calling sendSelfPipeByte() > >> eventually)? > > > > Historic raisins - there didn't use to be a SetLatch in > > procsignal_sigusr1_handler. That changed when I whacked around catchup & > > notify to be based on latches ([1] and following). > > > > [1] > > https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=59f71a0d0b56b2df48db4bf1738aece5551f7a47 > > > > Okay, but why call both SetLatch and latch_sigusr1_handler? What does > that buy us?
Nothing. It's how the code evolved, we can change that. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
