Re: SIGPIPE handling, take two.

From: Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com>
To: "pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SIGPIPE handling, take two.
Date: 2003-11-11 10:58:22
Message-ID: 3FB0C0CE.6050007@bigfoot.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Gaetano Mendola wrote:

> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>> I think this is the patch I like. It does the auto-detect handling as I
>> hoped. I will just do the doc updates to mention it.
>>
>> My only issue is that this is per-connection, while I think you have to
>> create a global variable that defaults to false, and on first connect,
>> check, and not after. Based on the code below, a second connection
>> would have the SIGPIPE signal set to SIG_IGN, not SIG_DEF, and you
>> would be back to setting SIG_IGN around each send, even though it was
>> already set.
>>
>> Are others OK with this too?
>
>
> I believe that the are some errors on the following code:
>
> #if !defined(HAVE_POSIX_SIGNALS)
> {
> pqsigfunc old;
> old = signal(SIGPIPE, SIG_IGN);
> if (old != SIG_DFL)
> conn->do_sigaction = false;
> signal(SIGPIPE, old);
> }
> #else
> {
> struct sigaction oact;
>
> if (sigaction(SIGPIPE, NULL, &oact) == 0 && oact.sa_handler !=
> SIG_DFL)
> conn->do_sigaction = false;
> }
> #endif /* !HAVE_POSIX_SIGNALS */
>
> the old signal handler is not reinstated in case of
> HAVE_POSIX_SIGNAL

Forget the message :-)

Gaetano

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message mendola 2003-11-11 11:10:36 cancel <3FB0B7CB.2070602@bigfoot.com>
Previous Message Gaetano Mendola 2003-11-11 10:19:55 Re: SIGPIPE handling, take two.