Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start

I wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
>> On 2017-04-20 19:23:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> or are the HANDLEs in a Windows WaitEventSet not inheritable
>>> resources?

>> So that kind of sounds like it should be doable.

> Ah, good.  I'll add a comment about that and press on.

So ... what would you say to replacing epoll_create() with
epoll_create1(EPOLL_CLOEXEC) ?  Then a WaitEventSet would not
represent inheritable-across-exec resources on any platform,
making it a lot easier to deal with the EXEC_BACKEND case.

AFAIK, both APIs are Linux-only, and epoll_create1() is not much
newer than epoll_create(), so it seems like we'd not be giving up
much portability if we insist on epoll_create1.
        regards, tom lane