Commit 4518c798 blocks signals for a short region of code, but it
assumed that whatever called it had the signal mask set to UnBlockSig on
entry.  That may be true today (or may even not be, in extensions in the
wild), but it would be better not to make that assumption.  We should
save-and-restore the caller's signal mask.

The PG_SETMASK() portability macro couldn't be used for that, which is
why it wasn't done before.  But... considering that commit a65e0864
established back in 9.6 that supported POSIX systems have sigprocmask(),
and that this is POSIX-only code, there is no reason not to use standard
sigprocmask() directly to achieve that.

Back-patch to all supported releases, like 4518c798 and 80845b7c.
Reviewed-by: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Reviewed-by: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA%2BhUKGKx6Biq7_UuV0kn9DW%2B8QWcpJC1qwhizdtD9tN-fn0H0g%40mail.gmail.com