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

[Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>]

"Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> writes:
> The difference is that if you fire the entire signal handler on the
> different thread, which means they can execute concurrently. That won't
> happen on Unix AFAIK - the main executino is stopped, right? So the
> "main thread" could change a variable while the signal handler is still
> executing - this can never happen in Unix when the signal handler
> executes, because the main thread is stopped?

Hm, good point.  There probably are some issues there for the more
complex signal handlers; they definitely assume nothing is changing
underneath them.

> An option would be to SuspendThread() on the main thread, which freezes
> it completely durnig the execution of the signal. If necessary, are we
> safe against that? (Basically, SuspendThread() will suspend a thread
> even if it's inside a kernel call. 

Why would that be a problem?

			regards, tom lane