| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers-win32 <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch |
| Date: | 2003-12-16 20:20:38 |
| Message-ID: | 3FDF6916.8020901@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers-win32 |
Steve Tibbett wrote:
>>Isn't WaitForSingleObject() in effect a polling call?
>>
>>
>
>It puts your thread to sleep, until it gets woken up by the handle
>you're waiting on being set to a signalled state.
>
>
>
Right. Just like select() puts your thread to sleep until one of its
files is ready (or it times out).
Do we have a terminology problem here?
The point is that, unlike classic Unix signal programming, you need
*something* that explicitly checks for the event. It could be a separate
thread in a tight loop, which is what the CONNX code appears to do, or
it could conceivably be something else in the main thread with a very
short timeout.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2003-12-16 20:20:49 | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch |
| Previous Message | Steve Tibbett | 2003-12-16 20:06:28 | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch |