From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Improving the comments in pqsignal() |
Date: | 2023-11-24 07:54:56 |
Message-ID: | 4e3cc3d3-8073-4d28-bfb7-69e9973f8097@iki.fi |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 24/11/2023 00:33, Thomas Munro wrote:
> Hi,
>
> While following along with Tristan and Heikki's thread about signals
> in psql, it occurred to me that the documentation atop pqsignal() is
> not very good:
>
> * we don't explain what problem it originally solved
> * we don't explain why it's still needed today
> * we don't explain what else it does for us today
> * we describe the backend implementation for Windows incorrectly (mea culpa)
> * we vaguely mention one issue with Windows frontend code, but I
> think the point made is misleading, and we don't convey the scale of
> the differences
>
> Here is my attempt to improve it.
Thanks!
> This is program 10.12 from Advanced Programming in the UNIX
> Environment, with minor changes.
In the copy I found online (3rd edition), it's "Figure 10.18", not
"program 10.12".
Other than that, looks good.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alexander Lakhin | 2023-11-24 08:00:01 | Re: Random pg_upgrade test failure on drongo |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-11-24 07:48:58 | Re: [PATCH] fix race condition in libpq (related to ssl connections) |