Re: postmaster.pid
Tom Lane <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.db.postgresql.devel.win32 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Should you not send the zero signal the same way >> as other signals, and just let the recipient ignore it? > Umm - my Linux manpage says that no signal is actually sent in these > circumstances, just a check that we could send some other signal if we > wanted to. Sure, but all that we have to emulate is that there is no visible effect on the target process. If it receives and throws away a zero signal, we're good. (Especially since this isn't done often enough to be a performance issue.) > So Dave's patch is clearly wrong where it returns EINVAL. How we should > distinguish between the other two cases I am less sure of - IANAWP ;-) I think we could just return ESRCH always if we have no pipe for the process. The callers will actually treat these errnos the same anyway. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [email protected])