Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> So why would I add another wrapper like PG_SETMASK and leave it
> unimplemented for now on Windows, when I could just use sigprocmask()
> directly and leave it unimplemented for now on Windows?
Fair enough, I guess. No objection to this patch.
(Someday we oughta go ahead and make our Windows signal API look more
like POSIX, as I suggested back in 2015. I'm still not taking
point on that, though.)
regards, tom lane