Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch

"Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net> writes:
> Well. There is one in the form of "make signal handlers thread-safe or
> defer non-threadsafe handlers".

As long as there is only one thread that can invoke signal handlers,
I don't see why you think they need to be "thread-safe".

It's already the case that we either handle execution of a signal
handler everywhere, or block delivery of the signal where we can't
handle it, because in the Unix model a signal handler can execute
anytime.

I'd be more concerned about whether the proposed implementation accurately
models signal mask processing (ie, temporary blocking of signal delivery).

            regards, tom lane