Re: stopgap fix for signal handling during restore_command

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Fujii Masao <fujii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: stopgap fix for signal handling during restore_command
Date: 2023-10-17 16:45:17
Message-ID: 20231017164517.GA613565@nathanxps13
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 10:46:47AM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Committed and back-patched.

... and it looks like some of the back-branches are failing for Windows.
I'm assuming this is because c290e79 was only back-patched to v15. My
first instinct is just to back-patch that one all the way to v11, but maybe
there's an alternative involving #ifdef WIN32. Are there any concerns with
back-patching c290e79?

--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2023-10-17 16:45:28 Re: Add support for AT LOCAL
Previous Message shihao zhong 2023-10-17 16:42:12 Re: Fix a wrong comment in setrefs.c