| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SIGQUIT handling, redux |
| Date: | 2020-09-10 18:26:59 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmobn6yDe69m_R8n-nrFjxsFAjwdOr5eiPVdd_Qx7+g8P=g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 12:56 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Also, man that CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() looks like trouble.
> Could we take that out?
Maybe I'm missing something, but why wouldn't that be a horrible idea?
We do not want to have long waits where we refuse to respond to
interrupts.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2020-09-10 18:32:48 | Re: WIP: BRIN multi-range indexes |
| Previous Message | Jameson, Hunter 'James' | 2020-09-10 18:09:19 | Re: Fix for parallel BTree initialization bug |